2023-05-30 08:31:00
According to European law expert Obwexer, a possible decision by the EU Parliament to skip Hungary as the Council Presidency would “only be of political relevance”. Suspending the Council Presidency would be “not legally compliant”.
Im EUParliament in Brussels this week, Hungary’s suitability to take over the EU Council Presidency in 2024 will be discussed. A resolution should call on the Council to find “an appropriate solution as quickly as possible”. Otherwise, Parliament threatens to take “appropriate measures”. Of course, they are very limited – European law experts agree on that. Also for the European law expert Walter Obwexer is a decision “only of political, not legal relevance”.
Due to the fact that the organs have autonomy in the rules of procedure, the European Parliament basically has no way of intervening in the Council Presidency, explains the university professor for European law, international law and international relations at the University of Innsbruck in conversation with the APA. Doubts that states confronted with Article 7 rule-of-law violation procedures (as is the case with Hungary and Poland, which will take over the presidency afterwards) could only concede to MEPs that they could hold a proper presidency send out a political signal.
New “Team Presidency”
Obwexer agrees with other observers that the ball for implementing any concerns lies with the Council. In theory, the “team presidency” model introduced in 2009 could be of great use. Because Hungary will form a team of three with Spain and Belgium from July 1, 2023 to December 31, 2024, Poland will form a trio with Denmark and Cyprus from January 1, 2025 to June 30, 2026. The teams each create a joint work program for 18 months.
“But within these 18 months, both Hungary and Poland will hold the presidency of the Council for six months each. They will be supported by the other members of the team presidency,” says Obwexer. “It is possible to deviate from this regulation within the team, but only by mutual agreement. Hungary and Poland could transfer those agendas associated with questions of the rule of law to another member state of the team presidency, but would have to initiate this change in the distribution of work themselves or to the at least agree. This doesn’t seem very realistic.”
John Morijn of the Meijers Committee, an independent group of legal experts based in Amsterdam, also considers this option “probably impractical,” as he told Politico magazine. As a face-saving option, however, it could become attractive if heavier guns were credibly positioned. The Meijers committee explains what these could be in a 13-page paper.
Council can regulate order of presidencies
For example, the Council could change the order in which the presidency is assumed, which it has already done six times in the past – mostly after new EU accessions. Obwexer objects that this would require a qualified majority (55 percent of the member states – currently 15 – which together make up at least 65 percent of the total population of the EU). “However, the equal treatment of all member states would have to be observed. A postponement of the Presidency of the Council regarding Hungary and Poland would probably only postpone the ‘rule of law problem’, but would not solve it.”
A third option brought into play, namely the suspension of the presidency of Hungary and Poland due to the violation of the rule of law, is considered by Obwexer to be “not legally compliant”. According to the sanctions procedure regulated in Article 7 of the EU Treaty, the European Council must unanimously determine that there has been a serious and persistent breach of values by one of these member states. Only then could the Council decide, by qualified majority, to suspend certain rights, such as the right to chair the Council.
For the time being, no decision that establishes a breach of contract
“However, the European Council has so far not adopted a decision establishing a serious and persistent violation of Union values (in particular the rule of law) by Hungary and/or Poland. Therefore, a suspension of the Presidency of the Council is not possible at this time,” notes the European lawyer clear.
However, “urgent action” is needed for the Meijers committee. It urges the current Swedish Presidency, the future trio partners of Hungary and Poland, the EU Member States, the Council and the European Parliament to take up the issue and include the Presidency issue in the negotiations. Because the best option for everyone is to immediately resolve the outstanding rule of law issues.
(WHAT)
#Hungary #Council #Presidency