Can a more fully democratic state preside over the European Union (EU)? This is the question that agitates the European political spheres when Hungary is due to take over the Presidency of the Council of the EU in July 2024. The European Parliament took up this subject, long taboo, on Thursday 1 June, by adopting a large majority resolution aimed at preventing Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbàn from taking over the reins of the EU, going so far as to threaten the Council with “boycott” if the Member States do not act.
If the subject appeals to European elected representatives, it is because the presidency of the Council of the European Union, which France held in the first half of 2022, is crucial for the proper functioning of the EU. The Council, in which the ministers of the Member States debate European legislation, is chaired in turn for six months by each of the 27 countries of the bloc, which then provide the impetus and define the priorities. A role incompatible with a democracy that has become “illiberal” and considered too close to Moscow, argue the deputies.
Conflict of values
“Hungary no longer recognizes itself in the European definition of democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights of the EU”, explains the environmentalist MEP Gwendoline Delbos-Corfield, at the origin of the resolution. The Frenchwoman is particularly concerned to see “a country subject to two sanction procedures under Article 7 of the Treaties” lead the EU. These procedures have seen the European Commission suspend billions of euros in European funds destined for Budapest for dshortcomings in the fight against corruption, the independence of the media and the judiciary as well as a homophobic law.
The question of the suspension of the Hungarian presidency is first of all symbolic. “We cannot leave the task of representing European democracy to someone who makes shocking remarks and who does not identify with the values of the EU”, alarmed Gwendoline Delbos-Corfield. But the concern also relates to the impact that this presidency could have on the functioning of the European institutions. “The Hungarian government constantly questions the system and wants to exploit it for its own interests. It uses all the power at its disposal to get what it wants”is alarmed Garvan Walshe, from the European Policy Center advocacy group. Thus, Budapest has regularly blocked EU sanctions against Russia.
Towards the adoption of new rules?
Proof that the subject is of concern, the resolution was presented by five of the seven political groups in the hemicycle, the European People’s Party, the Socialists and Democrats, Renew Europe, the Greens and the radical left. But the polite writing of the text, if it raises a concern, does not outline a concrete solution. Should we simply ban Hungary from taking the lead in the EU? “The European texts are quite unclear on the issue and it is not necessarily the most obvious solution”Judge Gwendoline Delbos-Corfield.
The EU Treaty, which establishes the principle of “equal rotation” between Member States for this presidency, does not provide for exceptions to the rule. It only happened once that a country deviated from it: the United Kingdom, after the Brexit vote in 2016.
One of the possible solutions could be for the Council “to postpone the date of the Hungarian presidency to a later date, while respecting the equality required by the treaties”analysis Garvan Walshe. Another option, “the adoption of a rule which prevents a country from taking the rotating presidency in the event of an open procedure under Article 7”, details the specialist. elongation “of the three-month Belgian and Spanish presidencies”proposed by the professor of European law Alberto Alemanno on Twitterseems more difficult to implement.
A “senseless” proposal according to Budapest
On this chapter, the role of Parliament is limited, because on the subject of rotating presidencies, only the Council can take a decision. In any event, Parliament’s resolution intimates to the States of “find a solution as soon as possible”. “What is important is that we discuss the subject, which was really a taboo a few months ago, and that we look at what can be done”emphasizes Gwendoline Delbos-Corfield.
The debate irritates Hungary, which immediately denounced on Tuesday “political pressure” of Parliament. The Minister of Justice, Judit Varga, thus defended the “sincerity” of his country, rejecting a discussion “senseless”, reports AFP. Despite the Hungarian rejection, the proposal seems to be gaining ground among some states, to the surprise of observers. German European Affairs Minister Anna Lührmann said on Tuesday that she had “doubts about Hungary’s ability to carry out its presidency of the Council”. Same story from the side of the Dutch Minister for Foreign Affairs, Wopke Hoekstra, who expressed his “discomfort” before this perspective.
What to move the other Member States? “For the moment, there is amazement, the subject was taboo, but it is now on the agenda, we have gone from a technical subject to a political subject”wants to believe Gwendoline Delbos-Corfield. “It’s a first step, but there is still a year before the start of the Hungarian presidency, the pressure could fall”, tempers Garvan Walshe. If nothing is done, Parliament has threatened to “boycott” some meetings, reports the English-speaking site Politico, in particular the trilogues, during which European laws are negotiated between the institutions. What greatly complicates the course of the future Hungarian presidency.
