**EU legal action against Hungary: expert report recommends stopping all payments**
“Systemic corruption” in the country Expert opinion recommends EU stop payments to Hungary
The EU Commission wants to show clear edges in the dispute with Viktor Orbán. Now renowned lawyers recommend not to transfer a single cent more to the country, saying it “regularly and widely” violates democratic principles.
There was great applause when Ursula von der Leyen promised a clear edge against Viktor Orbán three months ago. “We have activated the rule of law mechanism,” the EU Commission president coolly told the European Parliament. That would now be set in motion “according to the prescribed timetable.”
At last, it seemed, the EU wants to cut off the Hungarian prime minister’s purse strings because of his continued violations of democracy and the separation of powers.
Since then, the parties to the dispute have been eyeing each other in their ongoing conflict, which has been smoldering for years.
Sometimes Orbán provoked the EU with objections to Russia sanctions or corporate taxes. At other times, he sent emissaries to Brussels to signal concessions on the rule of law.
Von der Leyen, in turn, reiterated her criticism of Orbán, but in a similar dispute with Poland, she promised to allow blocked EU funds to flow again soon.
Can it be, many in Brussels are now asking, that the strong man in Budapest can also expect leniency?
Withholding “one hundred percent” of funds
If leading lawyers have their way, this scenario must not happen under any circumstances. On behalf of the Green Group in the European Parliament, legal scholars Kim Lane Scheppele (Princeton), Daniel Kehleman (University of New Jersey) and John Morijn (University of Groningen) have examined the case. And what they publish is likely to give the debate new momentum.
In their 32-page report, the professors conclude that the EU Commission should not only cut the country’s funding from the various agricultural, cohesion and reconstruction budgets. They even consider it “appropriate” and “proportionate” to cut Hungary off from any inflow of money from Brussels.
Because the country violates democratic principles in such a “fundamental, regular and far-reaching” way, the “legitimacy of the allocation of EU funds” in Hungary is generally at risk, they say. Therefore, the experts consider it “appropriate” for Brussels to “withhold one hundred percent” of the funds.
It is like a “drinking water pipe made of lead,” the trio of lawyers argues: as long as the poisoned pipe system has not been replaced, every drop of water that flows through it “must be considered contaminated.”
The result not only puts pressure on the EU Commission to press ahead with the proceedings against Orbán. It also hits the autocratic head of government at his most sensitive point.
For years, the head of government has staged himself as a defender of occidental values against an allegedly all too foreigner-friendly and decadent EU. At the same time, Orbán gladly accepts the billions from Brussels to reward family members and political favorites on a grand scale and to tailor the political system to himself.
As a result, he says, neither the administration nor the country’s auditors or courts are in a position to take action against the “systemic corruption” in Hungary. Until this changes, “the EU’s financial interests can only be defended by stopping the flow of money one hundred percent,” the report says.
The register of sins that the lawyers open up is long. Orbán had used his parliamentary majorities to curtail the rights of the opposition through repeated amendments to the constitution. For more than two years, he has ruled with the help of emergency laws that give him dictatorial powers. This in itself is a violation of the rule of law.
Orbán has used his political power to bring the judiciary under control. He has filled the Constitutional Court with partisans, forced independent judges out of office, and expanded the powers of the country’s politically influenced highest court. The authorities responsible for controlling state finances and awarding public contracts have also been subjected to Orbán’s influence, according to the study.
That EU funds are therefore being misused on a large scale is deduced by the experts from a series of violations in recent years. The Hungarian government has repeatedly ignored the findings of the EU fraud investigation authority OLAF. And according to a Commission study, a large number of public contracts had gone to a small number of companies whose owners were closely linked to the Orbán system.
The Hungarian violations of the rule of law are “inherent in the system,” the lawyers judge. What is needed, therefore, is a “proportional” response, as required by EU rules. The flow of EU funds to the country, the lawyers demand, must be stopped completely.
That is also the view of many members of the European Parliament. “After 60 infringement cases, our patience with Orbán is exhausted,” says Green MEP Daniel Freund. “European rules demand that all EU funds to Hungary be frozen immediately.” At the same time, he said, the Commission must present a roadmap for far-reaching reforms to the country’s political system, which Orbán must follow.
The Green MEP is concerned that von der Leyen could go too far in accommodating the Hungarian head of government in order to maintain EU unity in the Ukraine war. In the similar dispute with Poland, von der Leyen is already threatening to settle for cosmetic corrections, Freund warns. “This must not happen in the case of Hungary.”
The Green Party parliamentarian is not alone. When the legal opinion is presented this Wednesday, representatives of the conservative, liberal and social democratic groups in the EU Parliament will also be sitting at his side.
They are all also calling for consistent action against the head of government, whom von der Leyen’s predecessor in office, Jean-Claude Juncker, was already fond of calling a “dictator.”
“Money is the lever that impresses Orbán,” Freund says: “We have to use this lever.”
> On behalf of the Green Group in the European Parliament, legal scholars Kim Lane Scheppele (Princeton), Daniel Kehleman (University of New Jersey) and John Morijn (University of Groningen) have examined the case. And what they publish is likely to give the debate new momentum. In their 32-page report, the professors conclude that the EU Commission should not only cut the country’s funding from the various agricultural, cohesion and reconstruction budgets.
This should serve as an important lesson for bringing on board countries like poland and hungary.
Well if they dont do it, Hungary will poison many other EU countries. So we either deal with this now, or we will have do deal with 3-4 countries (similar to Hungary at the moment), years down the line.
4 comments
**EU legal action against Hungary: expert report recommends stopping all payments**
“Systemic corruption” in the country Expert opinion recommends EU stop payments to Hungary
The EU Commission wants to show clear edges in the dispute with Viktor Orbán. Now renowned lawyers recommend not to transfer a single cent more to the country, saying it “regularly and widely” violates democratic principles.
There was great applause when Ursula von der Leyen promised a clear edge against Viktor Orbán three months ago. “We have activated the rule of law mechanism,” the EU Commission president coolly told the European Parliament. That would now be set in motion “according to the prescribed timetable.”
At last, it seemed, the EU wants to cut off the Hungarian prime minister’s purse strings because of his continued violations of democracy and the separation of powers.
Since then, the parties to the dispute have been eyeing each other in their ongoing conflict, which has been smoldering for years.
Sometimes Orbán provoked the EU with objections to Russia sanctions or corporate taxes. At other times, he sent emissaries to Brussels to signal concessions on the rule of law.
Von der Leyen, in turn, reiterated her criticism of Orbán, but in a similar dispute with Poland, she promised to allow blocked EU funds to flow again soon.
Can it be, many in Brussels are now asking, that the strong man in Budapest can also expect leniency?
Withholding “one hundred percent” of funds
If leading lawyers have their way, this scenario must not happen under any circumstances. On behalf of the Green Group in the European Parliament, legal scholars Kim Lane Scheppele (Princeton), Daniel Kehleman (University of New Jersey) and John Morijn (University of Groningen) have examined the case. And what they publish is likely to give the debate new momentum.
In their 32-page report, the professors conclude that the EU Commission should not only cut the country’s funding from the various agricultural, cohesion and reconstruction budgets. They even consider it “appropriate” and “proportionate” to cut Hungary off from any inflow of money from Brussels.
Because the country violates democratic principles in such a “fundamental, regular and far-reaching” way, the “legitimacy of the allocation of EU funds” in Hungary is generally at risk, they say. Therefore, the experts consider it “appropriate” for Brussels to “withhold one hundred percent” of the funds.
It is like a “drinking water pipe made of lead,” the trio of lawyers argues: as long as the poisoned pipe system has not been replaced, every drop of water that flows through it “must be considered contaminated.”
The result not only puts pressure on the EU Commission to press ahead with the proceedings against Orbán. It also hits the autocratic head of government at his most sensitive point.
For years, the head of government has staged himself as a defender of occidental values against an allegedly all too foreigner-friendly and decadent EU. At the same time, Orbán gladly accepts the billions from Brussels to reward family members and political favorites on a grand scale and to tailor the political system to himself.
As a result, he says, neither the administration nor the country’s auditors or courts are in a position to take action against the “systemic corruption” in Hungary. Until this changes, “the EU’s financial interests can only be defended by stopping the flow of money one hundred percent,” the report says.
The register of sins that the lawyers open up is long. Orbán had used his parliamentary majorities to curtail the rights of the opposition through repeated amendments to the constitution. For more than two years, he has ruled with the help of emergency laws that give him dictatorial powers. This in itself is a violation of the rule of law.
Orbán has used his political power to bring the judiciary under control. He has filled the Constitutional Court with partisans, forced independent judges out of office, and expanded the powers of the country’s politically influenced highest court. The authorities responsible for controlling state finances and awarding public contracts have also been subjected to Orbán’s influence, according to the study.
That EU funds are therefore being misused on a large scale is deduced by the experts from a series of violations in recent years. The Hungarian government has repeatedly ignored the findings of the EU fraud investigation authority OLAF. And according to a Commission study, a large number of public contracts had gone to a small number of companies whose owners were closely linked to the Orbán system.
The Hungarian violations of the rule of law are “inherent in the system,” the lawyers judge. What is needed, therefore, is a “proportional” response, as required by EU rules. The flow of EU funds to the country, the lawyers demand, must be stopped completely.
That is also the view of many members of the European Parliament. “After 60 infringement cases, our patience with Orbán is exhausted,” says Green MEP Daniel Freund. “European rules demand that all EU funds to Hungary be frozen immediately.” At the same time, he said, the Commission must present a roadmap for far-reaching reforms to the country’s political system, which Orbán must follow.
The Green MEP is concerned that von der Leyen could go too far in accommodating the Hungarian head of government in order to maintain EU unity in the Ukraine war. In the similar dispute with Poland, von der Leyen is already threatening to settle for cosmetic corrections, Freund warns. “This must not happen in the case of Hungary.”
The Green Party parliamentarian is not alone. When the legal opinion is presented this Wednesday, representatives of the conservative, liberal and social democratic groups in the EU Parliament will also be sitting at his side.
They are all also calling for consistent action against the head of government, whom von der Leyen’s predecessor in office, Jean-Claude Juncker, was already fond of calling a “dictator.”
“Money is the lever that impresses Orbán,” Freund says: “We have to use this lever.”
Translated with [www.DeepL.com/Translator](http://www.DeepL.com/Translator) (free version)
> On behalf of the Green Group in the European Parliament, legal scholars Kim Lane Scheppele (Princeton), Daniel Kehleman (University of New Jersey) and John Morijn (University of Groningen) have examined the case. And what they publish is likely to give the debate new momentum. In their 32-page report, the professors conclude that the EU Commission should not only cut the country’s funding from the various agricultural, cohesion and reconstruction budgets.
Is this the same report the same three clowns put together exactly one year ago or is it a recycled version? https://danielfreund.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/220707_RoLCR_Report_digital.pdf
This should serve as an important lesson for bringing on board countries like poland and hungary.
Well if they dont do it, Hungary will poison many other EU countries. So we either deal with this now, or we will have do deal with 3-4 countries (similar to Hungary at the moment), years down the line.