I've been looking into it all day, I'm in the UK. What's interesting is they use the EU Convention on Human Rights as a means of gaining religious freedom in countries that have tried to restrict it, but the second article of the very section they use states people should have the freedom to leave a religion, so it seems they pick what they want but are not called out for the way they treat others. They can't be taken to the EU court of human rights, since they aren't a public organisation, but there's still the charity commission and I think it's important to create conversations around it as much as possible in the press. So many people just think the organisation's a little bit nuts and that people are in the main benign, as oppose to it wrecking lives and destroying families, something the more people know about the better.
The right to family, to privacy and to vote are all ratified by the UN and the EU, and therefore the organisation absolutely violates human rights over and over. I do agree that such violations pale when compared with so many civil violations, but on the level of the individual who's been wronged and denied basic rights then it's still an abuse, no organisation should wield that level of control.
It's only legal for countries who have ratified it, and some can agree to certain sections and others to not, but it's an ideal many organisations uphold, and are there to uphold, PEN and Amnesty being amongst some. Anyway, rambling!