Brussels, 13/01/2012 (Agence Europe) - On Thursday 12 January several political groups including the S&D and ALDE held a debate in the civil liberties committee (LIBE) at the European Parliament regarding the situation in Hungary. The director-general of DG Justice at the European Commission, Françoise Le Bail, was asked to give the Commission's reaction and outline its concerns. Unsurprisingly, the debate divided MEPs between those from the EPP Group, calling for a measured response, and others who want to see a tougher line taken. The European Commission is expected to indicate what it intends to do next Tuesday and say whether it will be opening infringement procedures against Budapest on the question of the central bank, the status of judges and the Hungarian data protection authority. On Wednesday, in Strasbourg, MEPs will also be debating the subject with Barroso.
On Thursday, MEPs from the LIBE committee obviously focused on the reforms planned by the new Hungarian constitution in the legal field. The Commission mentioned measures to retire judges and prosecutors at 62 years old, rather than 70, the independence of the judiciary and the independence of the data protection authority. Le Bail expressed the Commission's concern about the age reform, which would immediately lead to 274 judges being retired before the end of the year. She will examine whether this provision complies with European directives banning discrimination based on age in the employment field and whether these objective criteria justify this measure. Provisions on the independence of the legal system will also be verified on the basis of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the data protection authority against the 1995 data protection directive. Le Bail considers that the compatibility of some of these measures with EU law was “questionable”, and has promised that the Commission will complete its analysis in time for the college of commissioners to decide on 17 January, which could entail launching infringement procedures.
The first to react was EPP MEP Frank Engel, who described the heated exchange between the Commission and Hungary as a kind of “hysteria” and expressed a wish for a more “edifying debate” to take place at Parliament's return after the Christmas break. The Luxembourg MEP said that he was certain that Hungary would listen to the criticism made by the Commission and seek to resolve the matter. He would also, quite logically, like to wait for the final Commission analyses to be made, which is a necessary stage before any decision can be taken with regard to a “sovereign country”.
Kinga Gál (EPP, Hungary) chaired the debate and, whilst appealing for calm, also said: “We need this new constitution.” She added: “It can happen that there are mistakes, but I don't think this can give rise to any affirmation or rumour saying that there is a breach of democracy and the rule of law in Hungary.”
Axel Voss (EPP, Germany) said that the Commission did not have the remit to act: “The Charter of Fundamental Rights is primarily for the EU, not necessarily legally binding in this way for member states”. Louis Michel (ALDE, Belgium), responded to this by outlining the scale of this affair and the fact that he had participated in 2,000 sanctions taken by the EU against Austria and the presence of the FPO of the late Jorg Haïder in the government. The former commissioner said that the current situation in Hungary was quite dramatic and that the EU had to take immediate action by using Article 7 of the Treaty, which had been set up to respond to situations like the one that arose in Austria and which can, as a last resort, suspend the voting rights of a member state that is in serious violation with fundamental principles (Article 7 of the TEU therefore puts in place a prevention mechanism, in the event of a risk of common values being violated by a member state, as well as a sanctions mechanism if these values are violated). “This is about the risk of breach of fundamental rights”, argued Sophie int'Veld (ALDE, Netherlands), adding that activating Article 7 of the Treaty, in order to assess whether there is a risk of a serious breach of EU values, “would be justified”.
We are talking about “shared principles and values” and “Parliament cannot turn a blind eye to what is happening”, said Birgit Sippel (S&D, Germany), stressing, “this is not a discussion between the Commission and Hungary only. As the EU we lose all our credibility if one of our member states is not respecting fundamental rights.” (SP/transl.fl)