In a resolution approved by a large majority in mid-September last, the European Parliament proclaimed loud and clear that Hungary is not a full democracy but a “hybrid regime of electoral autocracy” that represents a systemic threat and a clear risk of serious violation of European values. Eight months later, the MEPs have returned to the fray with another resolution, which will be voted on this Thursday and which has the support of all the major groups, in which they question the “credibility” of the country they lead Victor Orban to occupy the rotating presidency of the EU during the second half of 2024. An idea that has achieved widespread support from the large groups in the Chamber but to which, for now, governments continue to turn a deaf ear.
“We are of the opinion that the Hungarian authorities are working constructively and closely with the European Commission to achieve results,” he said on Wednesday. Peter KullgrenMinister for Rural Affairs and Infrastructure of Sweden, speaking on behalf of the rotating presidency during his opening remarks at the debate on the rule of law and the funds freeze to Hungary in which you have not mentioned the possibility of taking measures to limit the Hungarian role in your European presidency. “We have the necessary tools and procedures in place to ensure that our fundamental rights are upheld,” she recalled. During his turn to answer, he did briefly pick up the gauntlet, but he limited himself to remembering that assuming the presidency means defending the interest of the EU as a whole. “All Member States have to be ready to assume this responsibility, which is very important,” he added.
Despite strong pressure from MEPs, there seems to be no appetite in the Council to deprive Hungary of its rotating EU presidency, which will also come in a period of low activity, as it will coincide with the start of the new legislature. “We will have to study it but we do not prejudge any option. We are very cautious because it would set a precedent,” say diplomatic sources who consider that withdrawing the rotating presidency from a country like Hungary could achieve the opposite effect. “Doing something like that would give those who are very critical of the EU in Hungary more reason to demolish what we have gradually tried to build over the last few years. We have a lot of issues on the table, including the war in Ukraine and the sanctions package that still has to be approved. It will not be by changing the order of the rotating presidency that we are going to resolve all these issues,” they maintain.
Pressure on the Council
“The first resolution of the European Parliament is from 2011, 12 years of decline and five years under the procedures of article 7 of the Treaty. How long can you be under the procedure? Fifteen, twenty years, without anything happening? How is it possible How does the EU defend itself in these cases?”, the French ecologist MEP asked at a press conference on Wednesday Gwendonline Delbos-Corfield, pleased with the commotion caused by the draft resolution and the idea of delaying the Hungarian rotating presidency of the EU. “We do not tell the Council what to do but we ask it to find a suitable solution to protect the EU and fundamental values,” she added.
Related news
The position of the ecologists is shared by popular, social democrats and liberals. “The Council must understand the seriousness of what is happening. Hungary is no longer a democracy“, has warned the Dutch socialist thijs reuten. “Waiting for a strong reaction from the Council is like waiting for Godot,” lamented the liberal Sophie in’t Veld, who recognizes that although it is the Council that must determine what to do with the rotating presidency “we strongly recommend that you speak with Orban and convince him to skip his turn.” Otherwise, he warns that the European Parliament is not entirely powerless.
“The European treaties say nothing about the obligation of the European Parliament to work with the Council presidency and in what way”, he stressed, pointing to the possibility of limiting the visibility of the Hungarian presidency, giving visibility to the opposition and use the normal negotiation procedure to limit the role of the Hungarian Government in the compromise negotiation. “We can think of many more ways to strip the presidency of all opportunities for Orban to make it a podium for himself, make it a podium for the Hungarian people and reduce cooperation to a minimum, that would be my suggestion,” he proposed. .