Brussels The European Commission is dampening expectations that the rule of law violations by the Polish and Hungarian governments will soon lead to a cut in EU funds. Last Wednesday, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) confirmed that such a cut in funds is possible. The commission is now saying that it is not expected to start in the next few weeks. It seems uncertain whether the judicial reform in Poland can even become the subject of a procedure.
“We will prepare each case very robustly and solidly in order to rule out as many risks as possible,” Justice Commissioner Didier Reynders told Handelsblatt. In addition, the ECJ emphasized the strict requirements for such procedures. “Each case must demonstrate a real link to the EU budget,” he said. “General concerns about deficiencies in the rule of law are not enough.”
The German government reacted very differently: “Now there is a simple and effective principle in Europe: Whoever breaks European law cannot count on European money.”, the German State Secretary for Europe, Anna Lührmann (Greens), celebrated the new possibilities in a speech in the Bundestag.
There are two very different perspectives on the rule of law mechanism: for one, it is a means of punishing a large number of violations quickly and fairly easily. Many members of the European Parliament see it that way.
Top jobs of the day
Find the best jobs now and
be notified by email.
However, the Commission likes to emphasize how narrow the scope of the mechanism is and now sees this as confirmed by the ECJ. However, the grounds for the judgment state several times that there must be a “genuine” connection between the breach of law and the EU budget. Commission officials take this to mean that they need to exercise extra caution.
Poland is a difficult case
This could make it difficult to take action against Poland. In recent years, the Polish government has created more and more opportunities to influence the judiciary. The ECJ has already condemned Poland for this.
If the rule of law procedure could be applied, it would be faster than a procedure before the ECJ and could entail higher costs for the state concerned. Many in the EU are hoping for this because they fear permanent damage to the political system in Poland.
>> Read here: The judges have cleared the way for the use of the rule of law mechanism. What’s happening now? The most important questions and answers.
But do the judicial reforms really affect the financial interests of the EU? This is very clear to many MEPs: They fear that the use of EU money in Poland is no longer subject to sufficiently independent controls.
This increases the risk of misappropriation. According to this line of reasoning, Poland could be deprived of practically all money that the country receives from the EU budget.
The Belgian does not want to make any mistakes in the proceedings against Poland and Hungary.
(Photo: REUTERS)
The Commission will consider very carefully whether it shares this view. “When we open a case, we want to make sure we can win it,” Reynders said.
It also depends on the point of view of the national governments. Reynders wants to use the foreign ministers’ meeting this Tuesday to get an impression of the mood among the member states. In order to cut a country’s funds, a qualified majority of the heads of state and government must agree at the end of the process.
Proposals are currently being discussed in the Polish parliament as to how the judicial reform could be modified or partially reversed. Reynders is open to aborting initiated procedures in the case of new developments. “It is not our aim to punish states. The goal is full compliance with the rule of law,” he said. “If a Member State responds by going back to European norms, we will stop the process.”
Hungary must fear proceedings
With regard to Hungary, things are clearer. The European Anti-Fraud Office (Olaf) finds far more financial irregularities in Hungary than any other country, at almost eight times the average.
Still, the government is doing little about it. In November, the EU Commission wrote to Hungary: “Risks related to nepotism, favoritism and nepotism in high-level public administration or risks arising from the interface between business and political actors remain unaddressed.”
The reference to the budget demanded by the ECJ is quite clear here. Nevertheless, the Commission says that the ECJ decision would have made the case more complicated. A quick opening of the procedure is therefore not necessarily to be expected.
The focus is on April 3rd. On this date a new parliament will be elected in Hungary. Prime Minister Viktor Orban fears losing his majority. If the Commission opens a procedure shortly beforehand, this could be understood as interference in the election.
However, Reynders does not want to take this into account. “There is no link between the political situation in a Member State and the fact that we analyze risks,” he said.
More on this: Why the EU funds are not enough to slow down Orban and Kaczynski – a comment