The European Parliament is seriously considering legal action against the European Commission regarding the allocation of EU funds to Hungary. Despite Brussels releasing €10.2 billion last December, over €20 billion remain blocked due to ‘rule of law concerns’.
As the enlargement process advances, the imperative to reform the European Union becomes increasingly pressing. Opinions are divided on how this should be achieved; the European Commission may soon unveil its own plans.
Emphasizing the need to resist ‘blackmail’, the resolution, approved by the vast majority of the MEPs, condemns the alleged ‘systematic efforts of the Hungarian government to undermine the EU’s founding values’. The resolution also highlights Hungary’s perceived violations of EU treaties, calling on the European Council to assess whether the country has committed ‘serious and persistent breaches of EU values.’
Debates about Hungary consistently bring to the forefront the Hungarophobic positions and opinions of the Left in the European Parliament. In the current session, left-wing MEPs targeted not only Viktor Orbán but also Ursula von der Leyen.
Leftist MEPs added a last-minute amendment to a resolution up for a vote on the European Parliament floor tomorrow in which they declare their intent to sue the European Commission for approving the release of €10.2 billion of the withheld cohesion funds to Hungary.
Ursula von der Leyen, presenting the report on the expected reforms for the EU accession of Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia, as well as the accession prospects for the Western Balkans and Turkey, announced that the European Commission recommends initiating accession negotiations with Ukraine and Moldova, as soon as they meet final conditions.
While the European Commission initially announced that it was putting its entire Palestinian development portfolio under review, it soon re-evaluated its decision, stating that it remains committed to preventing any misuse of aid funds, but also recognizes the importance of humanitarian aid in providing essential services to those in need.
In a radio interview, Minister István Nagy alleged that the European Commission was serving the interest of ‘US, Saudi, and Dutch companies and investors’ with their controversial decision, and not the small Ukrainian farmer’s as they claim.
As the European Commission’s politicization takes place without real democratic political legitimacy, serious dilemmas arise: what exactly are the interests of the President of the European Commission, and whom does she represent when she gives her annual State of the Union Address?
Timmermans’ name might ring a bell with our readers, as he has frequently criticised the Hungarian government and Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.