They are wrong. The law in some (all?) EU countries fortunately mandates lighting.

I have seen bike lanes where it's expected that cars will at least partially drive onto the lane because the road is too narrow.

And it's kinda ironic: pedestrians will likely blunder into the bike lane without looking, just like bikers sometimes suddenly pop before cars without the slightest care in the world.

Where I live, there are laws mandating the minimum distance a vehicle has to be from a cyclist when passing (1.5m) - this distance is not covered by the available clearance in the cycling lane.

If you can't see a cyclist is in the lane, it's difficult to give them safe clearance, and driving as though you are always giving clearance to cyclists means driving closer to the other traffic lane, increasing risk of vehicular collision.

Yes they are wrong, they are required by law to have lights. The cycle lane isn't continuous, there are breaks in it at every junction.

A car travelling in the opposite direction has to cross the path of the cycle lane to turn into a cross street. Not being able to see that a cycle is coming towards you isn't going to end well for the cyclist.