Articles for category: Ungarn

The Right To Die Like The Trees: Standing

My name is dr. Dániel András Karsai. I am a human rights attorney. I am also terminally ill. In August 2022, I was diagnosed with ALS. ALS is a so-called motor neurone disease. ALS leads to an extremely humiliating life situation, increasingly depriving you of independence. For reasons unknown to medical science, this disease causes nerve cells that move the muscles to deteriorate, leading to muscle atrophy and ultimately complete paralysis. At the end of the disease, respiratory functions also cease, resulting in death by asphyxiation. The final stage of the disease is virtually a vegetative existence, without any possibility of conscious activity or communication. For me, this form of existence is devoid of all meaning and dignity. In this situation, I firmly believe in the arguable claim to demand the right to end my life with dignity instead of enduring meaningless suffering.

Restoring the Rule of Law By Breaching It

The judicial reform recently passed by the Hungarian Parliament ostensibly seeks to restore the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law in Hungary. Crucially, it is also a vital step for the government to gain access to the 27 billion in frozen EU funds. While some might think that the EU’s strategy has been successful, a closer look shows that while the reform has the potential of improving judicial independence, the procedure leading to its adoption shows that there is no real commitment to restore the rule of law. In particular, throughout the law-making process the government consistently flouted the principle of legality, including the requirement of transparent, accountable, democratic and pluralistic law-making.

Can the Hungarian Council Presidency be Postponed – Legally?

By now, it is commonly agreed that Hungary is no longer a democracy. I will offer in this blogpost some legal underpinnings to the argument that occupying the Council presidency must rotate only among those states that are in compliance with Article 2 TEU values including the rule of law, those that are fully fledged representative democracies in line with Article 10 TEU, that have been in line with Article 49 TEU at the time of accession and never regressed.

An Inconvenient Constraint

On 1 July 2024, Hungary is set to take over the Presidency of the Council of Ministers. The European Parliament and the Meijers Committee issued reports questioning whether Hungary should be blocked from doing that. These proposals raise questions of political feasibility, however, especially as one may doubt if a Hungarian Council Presidency can do much practical damage to the EU. In addition, they also raise questions of legal feasibility. A logical prerequisite for preventing Hungary from holding the Presidency as long as it breaches the rule of law is that doing so is consistent with the EU’s own rule of law. I doubt it is.

Institutional Corsets and the Question of Timing

There has been a lot of noise around whether Hungary should, and legally could, be blocked from taking over the Council presidency in the second half of 2024, considering the state of the rule of law in the country. On 1 June, the European Parliament adopted a resolution, questioning Hungary’s ability to “credibly fulfill” the tasks of a Council presidency and asking the Council to “find a proper solution as soon as possible”, else Parliament could take “appropriate measures”. Such concerns are legitimate, but another question seems to be sidelined in the debate: How much practical damage can the upcoming Council presidency under Hungary actually do in the EU?

Betrayal

Various EU bodies have started to appreciate the threat the anti-constitutional challenge poses to fundamental rights and the entire EU. The Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA), the body primarily tasked with watching over fundamental rights, chose a different path and committed to collaboration and to legitimizing an illiberal regime. As earlier contributors to FRA reports on Hungary, we felt the responsibility to call attention to this unfortunate development: The FRA recently committed to rely on reporting from two governmental-controlled institutions, the National University of Public Service and the Hungarian ombudsperson.

Frozen

After years of inaction, the European Commission and Council jointly acted to freeze EU funds totaling more than €28.7 billion for Hungary and more than €110 billion for Poland at the end of 2022, citing rule-of-law violations. Surprisingly, the decisions were taken not just (or even primarily) using the new Conditionality Regulation designed for that purpose. Instead, they used a variety of other legal tools to which rule-of-law conditionality was attached. It remains somewhat mysterious, however, precisely which funds and what proportion of those funds have been suspended, and how those suspensions have been legally justified. This post, a shorter version of a SIEPS paper that will be published soon, describes what we know about the complex set of funding suspensions intended to make EU Member States pay for their rule-of-law violations.

The Council’s Conditionality Decision as a Violation of Academic Freedom?

On 15 December 2022, the Council’s suspended various EU budgetary commitments towards Hungary, the first application of the so-called Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation. The measure also froze access to Erasmus+ and Horizon Europe funds for 21 Hungarian universities that remain under the management of public interest trusts, thereby effectively denying access to these funds to a large pool of scholars and students. The decision raises important questions regarding the scope of protection afforded to final beneficiaries of EU funds. We suggest that a deeper engagement with the rights and interests of final beneficiaries in the context of the Conditionality Regulation necessitates a reconceptualisation of the EU’s understanding of and responsibility for academic freedom.

Too Much for Others, too Little for Us

The draft of the European Media Freedom Act (EMFA) published last September appears to constitute, in part, an attempt to respond to the systematic erosion of media freedom in Hungary since 2010. The European Commission seems to be aware of how unsuccessful it has been in addressing the problem. Thus, even though the rule of law proceedings against Hungary found a serious violation of media freedom, the conditionality procedure and the Charter of Fundamental Rights eligibility criteria inquiry failed to address the issue. Against this backdrop, this blogpost will analyse the draft EMFA’s capacity to respond to the unique challenges posed by the Hungarian media freedom landscape.

Ignorance and Evil

On 2 February 2023, the Hungarian Constitutional Court published its long-awaited decision on legal gender recognition. For the first time, the Constitutional Court reviewed the provisions introduced into the Act on Registry Procedure in late May 2020 requiring the registration of the sex at birth (instead of sex) and banning any modification to that registry entry. With its decision, the Constitutional Court chose to remain concordant with the perceived political expectations, blatantly served the interest of the government majority, and echoed their fixation of biologically determined sex.