“`html
Hungary Under Scrutiny: EU Parliament Debates Rule of Law, Considers Further Action
Table of Contents
- 1. Hungary Under Scrutiny: EU Parliament Debates Rule of Law, Considers Further Action
- 2. Understanding Article 7: A Primer
- 3. the Stalled Article 7 Procedure
- 4. Renewed Momentum?
- 5. Implications for the U.S.
- 6. How does the potential submission of Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union relate to the concerns raised regarding hungary’s “Pride Law” and the proposed MEP asset declaration bill?
- 7. Hungary Under Scrutiny: An Archyde News Interview with Dr. Anya Kovacs
Published:
Strasbourg, France – On April 2, the European Parliament once again turned its attention to Hungary, holding a plenary debate on the state of the rule of law within the nation. While previous discussions have centered on broader concerns, this session focused specifically on two contentious pieces of legislation: a recently enacted law restricting the rights of the LGBTQ+ community (often referred to as the “Pride law”) and a proposed bill championed by Fidesz MEP Balázs Hidvéghi, which would mandate asset declarations for Hungarian Members of the European Parliament (MEPs).
The “Pride law” has drawn widespread condemnation for its perceived discriminatory nature and its restrictions on the rights of assembly for LGBTQ+ individuals. Critics argue it mirrors similar legislation in other countries, such as Russia’s “gay propaganda” law, which has been used to suppress LGBTQ+ activism and expression. This raises concerns within the U.S., especially given the ongoing debates on LGBTQ+ rights at state and federal levels, where the implications of such laws resonate deeply.
The proposed bill requiring Hungarian MEPs to declare their assets has also sparked controversy. Opponents argue that,in its current form,the bill could allow the National Election Commission (NVB) to potentially strip MEPs of their mandates,a power that critics believe is disproportionate and could be used for political purposes. Such action, some argue, represents “double standards, because the NVB cannot act this way for MPs,” potentially undermining the independence of elected officials. This echoes concerns about election integrity and fairness that are increasingly prevalent in the U.S. political landscape.
The debate itself largely rehashed familiar arguments. Left-leaning political groups, including the Greens, Renew, the Socialists & Democrats (S&D), and even factions within the center-right european People’s Party (EPP), voiced strong criticism of the Hungarian government’s policies.They urged the European Commission and the Council of the European Union to take decisive action against what they perceive as violations of EU law and fundamental values.
Conversely, right-wing factions, including members of Fidesz, the KDNP (Christian Democratic People’s Party), the European Conservatives and reformists, and the European Right Sovereign Nations Europe, defended the Hungarian government. Their arguments centered on the idea that the “Pride law” is intended to protect children. They also criticized the European Commission and Parliament for what they see as unwarranted interference in the sovereign decisions of a democratically elected government, arguing that the EU should focus on more pressing issues. These viewpoints reflect the ongoing tensions between national sovereignty and EU oversight, a debate familiar to American audiences concerning states’ rights versus federal authority.
A key point of contention remains the application of Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union, a mechanism designed to address breaches of the EU’s fundamental values. While left-leaning and liberal groups advocate for its use, viewing it as an essential tool for safeguarding the rule of law, right-wing factions dismiss it as a politically motivated “jerk” instrument wielded by the Commission and the Council.
Adding to the pressure, reports suggest that a growing number of member states are in favor of advancing the Article 7 procedure against Hungary.This action stirs concern across the U.S., especially among legal scholars and human rights advocates, who are closely monitoring the implications for international law and democratic governance.
Understanding Article 7: A Primer
Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union is invoked when there is a perceived risk of a member state violating the EU’s core values: freedom, equality, democracy, the rule of law, human dignity, and human rights.
The process unfolds in several stages:
- Initiation: The European Commission, the European Parliament, or one-third of the member states can initiate the procedure. The European Parliament then votes on weather to proceed.
- Dialog: The Council of the European Union (Council) engages in a dialogue with the member state in question. A “clear danger” of a serious breach of EU values must be established by a four-fifths majority in the Council.
- Sanctions: To impose sanctions, the European Council (composed of the heads of state and government of the member states) must unanimously determine that the member state has “severely and persistently” violated EU values.Only then can the Council vote on sanctions, which could include suspending the member state’s voting rights.
Treaty on European Union, Article 7
the Article 7 procedure against Hungary was initiated on September 12, 2018, following a vote in the European Parliament based on the Sargentini report. This report concluded that the Hungarian government might potentially be at risk of violating the EU’s fundamental values. However, the process has been stalled for years in the Council, with no substantive progress made.
The EU’s struggle to reconcile its principles with the actions of member states like Hungary is a critical test of its commitment to shared values.The outcome of this situation will have significant repercussions for the future of the Union and its role in upholding democratic norms both within Europe and on the global stage.
the Stalled Article 7 Procedure
despite the initial steps taken in 2018, the Article 7 procedure against Hungary has effectively remained in limbo. Following the European Parliament’s initial vote, the process moved to the Council of the European Union, where hearings involving the Hungarian government were supposed to take place.
These hearings were intended to foster dialogue between EU institutions and hungary, with the goal of addressing the identified infringements and ensuring compliance with EU recommendations. however, progress has been hampered by a lack of political will within the Council.
For the Article 7 procedure to advance, the member state holding the rotating presidency of the Council must prioritize the issue and place it on the agenda for a vote. While some presidencies have facilitated hearings, a vote on whether there is a “clear danger” to EU values in Hungary has never occurred due to a lack of support from member states.This inaction reflects the deep divisions within the EU regarding how to address perceived violations of the rule of law by member states. The situation is comparable to debates within the U.S. concerning federal overreach, a sentiment that resonates with state sovereignty advocates.
Renewed Momentum?
According to Eurologist, there might potentially be renewed momentum to advance the Article 7 procedure. The report suggests that as many as 19 member states are now prepared to vote in favor of continuing the proceedings against Hungary in the Council. These states reportedly include Austria, Belgium, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, the Netherlands, Ireland, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Germany, italy, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and Slovenia.
However, reaching the required four-fifths majority (22 out of 27 member states) remains a challenge. To reach that threshold, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Greece, Croatia, Malta, Romania, and Slovakia would need to shift their positions.
Even if the Council were to determine that there is a risk of a serious breach of EU values in Hungary, the process would still face significant hurdles. the next step would involve the European council (the heads of state and government of the member states) unanimously declaring that Hungary is persistently violating the EU’s fundamental rights.reaching such unanimity is highly unlikely, particularly given that Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has previously indicated that he would veto any such decision. This reflects the complexities of EU decision-making and the potential for individual member states to block collective action.
Implications for the U.S.
The situation in Hungary and the EU’s response have implications for the United States. As a champion of democracy and human rights, the U.S. frequently enough looks to the EU as a partner in promoting these values globally. However, the EU’s struggles to address perceived backsliding on the rule of law within its own member states raise questions about its effectiveness as a global leader in this area.
Furthermore, the debates surrounding national sovereignty versus supranational authority resonate with similar discussions within the U.S., particularly concerning states’ rights and federal power. The Hungarian case serves as a reminder of the challenges inherent in balancing these competing principles in a democratic system.
the U.S.government, along with various non-governmental organizations, will likely continue to monitor the situation in Hungary closely and to advocate for the protection of human rights and the rule of law. The case also underscores the importance of transatlantic cooperation in addressing these challenges and promoting democratic values around the world.
| Key Legislation | Controversy | U.S. Parallel |
|---|---|---|
| “Pride Law” (LGBTQ+ Restrictions) | Perceived discrimination, violation of assembly rights. | State laws restricting LGBTQ+ rights, debates on “Don’t Say Gay” legislation. |
| MEP Asset Declaration Bill | Potential for political manipulation, undermines independence. | Concerns over campaign finance, ethics rules for elected officials. |
| Article 7 Procedure | Divisions within EU on enforcement, hampered by political will.
How does the potential submission of Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union relate to the concerns raised regarding hungary’s “Pride Law” and the proposed MEP asset declaration bill?
Hungary Under Scrutiny: An Archyde News Interview with Dr. Anya KovacsArchyde News: Welcome, Dr. Kovacs. Thank you for joining us today. For our readers, coudl you briefly introduce yourself and your work related to the European Union and human rights? Dr. Kovacs: Thank you for having me. I’m Dr. Anya Kovacs, a legal scholar specializing in European Union law and human rights. I’ve followed the developments regarding the rule of law in Hungary closely,particularly concerning the recent parliamentary debates. Archyde News: The European Parliament’s recent debate on Hungary, focusing on the “Pride Law” and the proposed MEP asset declaration bill, seems to underscore existing concerns. How would you summarize the core issues at stake? dr. Kovacs: Essentially, it boils down to the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms.The “Pride Law” raises serious questions about discrimination and freedom of assembly. The asset declaration bill, if implemented in its current form, perhaps undermines the independence of elected officials, creating a perception of political overreach. Archyde News: The article mentions the potential application of Article 7.Could you elaborate on the significance of this mechanism? Dr. Kovacs: Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union is a crucial mechanism to address potential breaches of the EU’s fundamental values: freedom, equality, democracy, the rule of law, human dignity, and human rights.It allows the EU to hold member states accountable for upholding these principles. archyde News: The procedure has been stalled. Why is it so difficult to get this Article 7 procedure off the ground? Dr. Kovacs: As of a lack of the required consensus within the Council of the European Union. For the procedure to move forward, a member state holding the rotating presidency has to prioritize the issue. A meaningful barrier is the need for unanimity to impose sanctions. Some member states are reluctant to take action, reflecting differing political ideologies and agendas. Archyde News: The article mentioned renewed momentum and the potential for more member states to support the procedure. What are the implications if this support grows? Dr. Kovacs: A shift in support would indicate a stronger stance against perceived erosion of rule of law within Hungary. If more states back the procedure, it increases the likelihood of a formal assessment from the Council. However, hurdles remain, particularly in achieving the required level of consensus for sanctions. Archyde News: Considering the implications for transatlantic relations, especially for the U.S., what should U.S. policymakers be watching? Dr.Kovacs: The U.S. has an interest in upholding democratic values globally and often partners with the EU on human rights issues. Thus, the EU’s ability to address democratic backsliding within its own ranks has implications. It is also a lesson in the challenges of navigating the balance of power between national sovereignty and supranational institutions,an echo to the U.S. on the topic of States rights vs federal authority. The U.S. should continue to monitor the situation and advocate for the protection of human rights through dialogues and, where necessary, targeted measures. Archyde News: This is a really fascinating point. Dr. Kovacs, in your professional opinion, do you believe the “Pride Law” and the MEP asset declaration bill are truly autonomous matters or two sides of the same coin regarding the fundamental rule of law? Dr.Kovacs: Both are interconnected.The LGBTQ+ law speaks to fundamental human rights and values, and the MEP declaration bill represents an assault on independent checks and balances. It truly seems they are both related to an overall pattern of democratic backsliding. Archyde News: Thank you for your insights, Dr. Kovacs. Is there anything else you would like to add? Dr. Kovacs: I would encourage readers to stay informed and engaged; it is indeed critically important as citizens to participate in this process.
Leave a Replay       Recent PostsTagsarticles
Boursorama
charm Xi'an
chronic
cojp
Crime
daily
Donald Trump
Echo (cat)
football
French companies course
Gaza
health
horoscope predictions
immovable
Indonesia
international
israel
Latest Malayalam News
Lifestyle
Major News
News
News Translated into Japanese
offers
oil prices
OPEC Budget
pakistan
Palestine
Politics
Russia
Saudi women
soccer
Sports News
stock exchanges
story
Studies
The UAE
to me
trackers
Translated News
weather
World
Xi'an Daily Official Website
Xi'an News Network
your luck today
© 2025 All rights reserved 
|