In a resolution adopted by a strong majority in mid-September of the previous year, the European Parliament declared with clarity that Hungary is not a full democracy but a hybrid regime of electoral autocracy, signaling a systemic threat and a clear risk to core European values. Eight months later, lawmakers return to the debate with another resolution slated for this Thursday. It has the support of all major groups and questions the credibility of the government currently in charge of Hungary. Victor Orban begins the second half of 2024 with the EU presidency, a move that has drawn broad backing across Parliament, though governments outside the chamber remain measured in their responses.
“We believe Hungarian authorities are engaging constructively with the European Commission to achieve tangible results,” said a speaker on Wednesday, presenting the view of the term presidency to the rule of law debate and the frozen funds issue tied to Hungary. The speaker did not suggest immediate measures to curb Hungary’s role in the presidency. “We possess the necessary tools and procedures to safeguard fundamental rights,” the speaker added, noting that the presidency carries a duty to defend EU interests as a whole. All member states must be ready to assume this crucial responsibility, they concluded.
Despite pressure from European Parliament members, there appears to be little appetite in the Council to strip Hungary of the rotating presidency, a period of relatively low legislative activity as it coincides with the start of a new parliamentary term. Diplomatic sources indicate that removing the presidency from Hungary could be a meaningful signal, yet they caution that such a step sets a precedent and may provoke a counterproductive backlash. Critics warn that such a move could embolden hard critics of the EU within Hungary and undermine recent efforts to build consensus over several years. Issues including the war in Ukraine and sanctions measures still awaiting ratification loom large as the presidency unfolds.
Pressure on the Council
“Since the first decision of the European Parliament in 2011, we have witnessed years of regression under procedures outlined in Article 7 of the Treaty. How long can this go on before action is taken? Fifteen, twenty years with little progress?” asked a French ecologist MEP during a Wednesday press briefing. Gwendoline Delbos-Cublac, pleased by the turbulence surrounding the draft resolution and the idea of delaying Hungary’s rotating EU presidency, remarked that the Council is not guided by the Parliament but is expected to find a solution that protects the EU and its core values.
The ecologist position enjoys broad support among social democrats and liberals. “The Council must recognize the gravity of what has happened. Hungary may no longer be a democracy,” warned a Dutch socialist. “Waiting for a strong response from the Council is like waiting for Godot,” criticized a Liberal. Sophie in the Veld noted that, while it is the Council that must decide how to handle the rotating presidency, the Parliament expects it to engage with Orban and seek a path that does not place the presidency at risk. If no such path emerges, the Parliament reserves the right to act within its own powers.
“EU agreements do not impose a direct obligation on the European Parliament to cooperate with the Presidency of the Council in every procedural step,” another speaker stressed. He pointed to possible moves to reduce the visibility of the Hungarian presidency, to amplify opposition voices, and to use standard negotiation channels to limit the government’s influence in reconciliation talks. “There are multiple avenues for restricting Orban’s ability to turn the presidency into a podium for national messaging, and to minimize cooperation. That is something I would seriously consider,” he added.
In summary, the debate centers on how the European Union should respond to concerns about democratic standards in Hungary while balancing the need to maintain a functional presidency and the unity of the bloc. The discussions show a spectrum of opinions on whether to suppress or reform the presidency’s role, with a focus on protecting EU values and ensuring accountable governance across member states. The debate continues to unfold as the presidency proceeds, with ongoing assessments of the best path forward for the Union as a whole, and with an eye toward how member states can work together to uphold shared principles. This analysis is drawn from parliamentary records and public statements surrounding the ongoing discussions on the presidency and rule of law issues. [Citation: European Parliament debates, 2024]
Related posts:
The goalscorers of Lionel Scaloni’s cycle in the Argentina national team EU Presidency and Rule of Law: Hungary’s Role Under Scrutiny Hungary’s Orban and Putin Talk on Ceasefire, Elections, and European Dialogue Girona overpower Mallorca in a 5-3 La Liga thriller to top the table EU Council Presidency and Leadership Transitions: Hungary, Orbán, and Michel Orban Signals Shift in EU Strategy and Ukraine Aid Debate Real Betis edges Mallorca in a tense LaLiga clash Spain’s EU Presidency in 2023: Balancing Leadership, Risks, and Regional Ties Data sheet and match recap: Celta Vigo and Espanyol open LaLiga with a late penalty twist Hungary weighs calm response to possible Orbán interim EU Council presidency Rodrygo’s Moment Steers Real Madrid Past Cacereño in Copa del Rey Mallorca and Osasuna share spoils after late red card in La Liga clash