Romania’s government will appeal Austria’s veto against Romania’s Schengen accession to the European Court of Justice

3 comments

1. >MEP Rareș Bogdan, first vice-president of PNL, announced Tuesday in the European Parliament that the Romanian government will appeal to the EU Court of Justice (CJEU) against the Austrian vote against Romania’s accession to Schengen.
   >
   >
   >
   >Rareș Bogdan began his speech in the Parliament’s plenary by calling on the European Commission and the European Parliament to challenge the vote in the JHA Council at the CJEU, pointing out that Austria’s vote violates Article 21 of the EU Treaty.
   >
   >
   >
   >At one point, MEP Eugen Tomac reminded Rareș Bogdan that he is a political leader in Romania, the first vice-president of the ruling party PNL, and asked the Romanian government to challenge the JHA Council vote in court.
   >
   >
   >
   >Tomac pointed out that the Romanian government is a “privileged plaintiff” and can take “this abuse” to the European Court of Justice.”I assure you that the government will do so because it is the worst injustice in the last 70 years and this will be sanctioned and Austria will bear the consequences,” Rareș Bogdan said at the time.
   >
   >
   >
   >G4Media asked the Romanian government for a point of view on the statement by PNL first vice-president Rareș Bogdan. We will publish the reaction of the Victoria Palace when we receive it.

   Translated with DeepL.

2. Rareș Bogdan is a slithering political reptile of the lowest order. Perfect match for the Austrian chancellor.

3. It will be interesting to see how this turns out. Afaik the veto right is a political right that is granted to each member and can be even used without justification. In fact it is not even a veto right but the principle of unanimity.

   This case however is especially interesting, as two EU laws collide. While Austria has the right to veto, Romania and Bulgaria have the right and even the duty to integrate into Schengen.

   This is in my opinion the only valid argument for the veto being invalid. So the questions that the court would have to answer are:

   Which rights are valued as more important?

   Is the unanimity principle in contradiction to the duty to integrate into Schengen? If yes this must be repaired by the political actors.