Money against securities: why Brussels does not penalize Hungary and Poland?

An article published on the BBC’s Russian news service website states that in the past eight years, the European Commission (EC) has sued Hungary three times and Poland four times before the Court of Justice of the European Communities.

All complaints concern violations of the rule of law and the separation of powers.

The Court has already ruled on most of these complaints, not in favor of Budapest and Warsaw.

Last Sunday’s presidential election in Poland was won by ruling party candidate Andrzej Duda, who made a lot of noise during the election campaign, claiming that LGBT ideology was worse than communism.

In the eyes of many Europeans, this is also a violation of fundamental EU principles.

In particular, the prohibition of discrimination based on sexual orientation.

However, despite all the steps and declarations of the Hungarian and Polish authorities, despite the fact that the most determined critics call Hungary the first authoritarian regime within the EU (the situation in Poland is very different), the Community practically it does not penalize these countries for deviating from EU principles. Why?

The Community practically does not penalize Hungary and Poland for deviating from the principles enshrined in the EU instruments.

He has no serious weapon

Most experts and politicians respond: There are no instruments, according to a BBC news service in Russian.

The mechanism for imposing sanctions against a single state in the EU, a voluntary alliance of sovereign nations, is too complex to implement.

“A. Duda’s victory in itself will not further complicate Poland’s relations with the European institutions. However, by continuing to control both the Parliament, the government and the President, the team of Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the leader of Justice and Justice will certainly continue to sharpen relations with Brussels. However, the EC does not appear to be prepared to impose severe sanctions. Brussels does not have a serious weapon against Poland, “Ivan Preobrazhensky, a political scientist and expert in Central and Eastern Europe of Prague

However, by continuing to control both Parliament, the government and the President, the team of Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the leader of Justice and Justice, will certainly continue to sharpen relations with Brussels.

Theoretically, a country could be temporarily deprived of the right to vote in the EU’s central bodies.

However, Article 7 of the EU Treaty establishes a procedure such that, in the opinion of many lawyers, it is practically impossible to use.

In accordance with Article 7, the European Council (EC) may, acting unanimously on the proposal of a third of the Member States or the EC and after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament, decide that a Member State is in serious violation and persistent European values.

However, an article in the BBC’s Russian news service states that already at this stage, any of the allies can block the entire process.

However, if consensus is reached, a qualified majority of the EVS will be from at least 15 and 27 Member States, representing at least 65%. EU citizens: they can deprive a “colleague” of the right to vote.

“I would say the Article 7 procedure is just grotesquely complicated,” says the BBC, quoting Wojciech Sadurski, an expert in Polish constitutional law and a professor at the University of Sydney.

The Article 7 procedure, I would say, is simply grotesquely complicated.

The ruling Law and Justice Party and public television controlled by him filed three lawsuits against V. Sadurskis. They accuse him of slander.

However, Poland is still a long way from countries where disputes involving the state or the ruling party have always been resolved: one of the aforementioned lawsuits, Law and Justice, has been lost.

The other case was adjourned indefinitely, and the third case is pending.

Conflicting signals

As the BBC’s Russian news service told EU constitutional law expert Laurent Pech of Middlesex University, both Hungary and Poland are sending conflicting signals.

In Brussels, the parties explain that they will comply with the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union, and at home they tell their audience that they will find ways to do the same, only by other means.

Of the two judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union on Poland, in Pech’s words, one was applied by Warsaw and the other was not.

Both judgments referred to new laws that, in the opinion of the Polish opposition, the EC and the Court of Justice of the European Union, the ruling party had attempted to partially politicize the judiciary.

In June, the court ordered Hungary to repeal the law on “foreign agents”.

“However, the Hungarian authorities, on the one hand, say they will implement the court’s decision and, on the other hand, promise to adopt a new law with essentially the same content,” Pech told the BBC’s Russian news service.

However, the Hungarian authorities, on the one hand, say they will implement the court ruling and, on the other hand, promise to pass a new law with essentially the same content.

He disagrees with the EC and many other lawyers who say that Brussels has no other instruments to put pressure on offending countries.

“The toolkit is. The problem is not in them, but in who uses them, “says the professor.

In his opinion, if the EC had the political will, it could go to the Court more frequently against the offending countries.

You could also use certain financial restrictions.

Furthermore, there is nothing to stop individual countries from taking measures like those against Austria in 2000, when the right-wing, populist Freedom Party was in government.

Furthermore, there is nothing to stop individual countries from taking measures like those against Austria in 2000, when the right-wing, populist Freedom Party was in government.

At the same time, 14 EU countries announced a diplomatic boycott of Vienna, according to the BBC’s Russian news service website.

Just a bluff?

The EC has proposed giving Brussels a new instrument, the right to suspend payments from the EU budget to countries that do not respect the rule of law.

The last EVS should also consider this proposal.

An article in the BBC’s Russian news service emphasizes that Poland and Hungary are firmly ahead of them.

Specific countries are not mentioned in the draft proposal, of course, but no one, including the authorities of these two countries, doubts that the EC referred to them.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban made a decision this week through a controlled parliament to get the government to vote against the Brussels proposal.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban made a decision this week through a controlled parliament to get the government to vote against the Brussels proposal.

As Pech explains, there would be no consensus on adopting such a mechanism, but Hungary and Poland threaten to veto the EU budget itself if a decision on financial sanctions is made at the same time.

According to the BBC, Budapest and Warsaw once again show their determination to fight EVS.

But blocking the entire budget would mean losing money for everyone, including these countries.

Mr. Pech is convinced that such a determination is just a bluff aimed at negotiating the level of credits.

The EU does not want to leave

The Hungarian and Polish authorities, as well as their like-minded people in other EU countries, are challenging the opponents’ original position, arguing that their policies are in line with fundamental European values.

They say that these Western federal-liberals take for granted that the rule of law and the separation of powers are the cornerstone of European identity, one of the fundamental values ​​on which the EU is based. But where did they get it from? All European countries have different cultures and we need to discuss our common values, according to a BBC publication.

Opponents reply: But you joined the EU in 2004 and pledged to respect the principles of the state and society that you adopted.

Opponents reply: But you joined the EU in 2004 and pledged to respect the principles of the state and society that you adopted.

“Nothing prevents them from leaving the EU and organizing any other union,” says Professor L. Pechonizes.

Hungary and Poland, unlike Great Britain, do not want to leave the EU.

The governments of their countries, like most eurosceptics in continental Europe, believe that the EU’s single market benefits everyone, but that European economic integration must end, the BBC’s Russian service said in an article.

They oppose the moment that without common values, there will be no single market.