[ad_1]
At Wednesday’s meeting of the European Parliament faction in the European Parliament, there was a debate on the budget vetoes of Hungary and Poland. On the sidelines of the rule of law speech, Manfred Weber, the leader of the Popular Party faction, found that the arguments of the Sargentini report condemning the Hungarian rule of law will not be brought before the Court of Justice of the European Union, writes Magyar Nemzet.
The Bavarian politician thus declared the previous argument of the Hungarian government that the document was of legal interest, according to the newspaper of sources of the Popular Party.
However, in the fall of 2018, Weber himself voted in favor of the report, on the basis of which the so-called rule of law procedure against Hungary was activated under the seven-article article. Enikő Győri from the Hungarian delegation drew attention to this contradiction in the online meeting.
Regarding the announced conditions of the rule of law, József Szájer, chairman of the European Parliament delegation Fidesz-KDNP, stated that the requirement of the rule of law is now used for political purposes in the ranks of the EU and is applied in an arbitrary. According to the Fidesz politician, it would be absurd to punish Hungary for its veto, as the EU treaties grant the right to do so.
According to sources, contrary to what Weber writes in a Twitter post on Wednesday, there was not complete consistency in the EPP group in the European Parliament regarding the set of conditions to be attached to the EU financial package. It is revealing, however, that the Finnish Petri Sarvamaa, rapporteur for the People’s Party on the matter, critical of the Hungarian government, has said that the European Parliament, and therefore the European People’s Party, must defend the proclaimed conditionality.
The Fidesz-KDNP group in the European Parliament also announced on Twitter on Wednesday that the government’s position on its support was assured at the faction meeting that the system of budget conditions in its current form is unacceptable, the newspaper writes.
[ad_2]
