Brussels, 11/03/2014 (Agence Europe) - As it announced in September of last year, the European Commission made a proposal on Tuesday 11 March for a new rule of law safeguard mechanism in the EU “for addressing systemic threats to the rule of law in any of the EU's 28 member states', it explains in a press release.
This move follows to guideline debates in the Council, held in August 2013 and 25 February of this year. In spring 2013, four member states expressed concern regarding the fundamental rights situation in the EU and launched an initiative in this direction. The initiative, which was launched by Germany, Finland, Denmark and the Netherlands, came into being after various controversies related to Hungarian reforms, although no specific connection was ever established.
The Commission believes that the system should cover all member states, without exception. Commissioner Viviane Reding (responsible for justice) has anticipated in recent months that this position would not be to everybody's liking, starting with the four pioneer countries.
What exactly is the Commission proposing? It is seeking middle ground between (1) infringement procedures which can in some cases be limited due to the scope of Community texts and (2) Article 7 of the Treaty, which is often described as a nuclear weapon because once triggered (albeit with great difficulty), it can lead to the suspension of the country''s voting rights. “The new rule of law framework will be complementary to infringement procedures - when EU law has been breached - and to the so-called Article 7 procedure of the Lisbon Treaty which, at its most severe, allows for the suspension of voting rights in case of a serious and persistent breach of EU values by a member state”, the Commission explains.
This new framework establishes an early warning tool allowing the Commission to enter into dialogue with the member state concerned “to prevent the escalation of systemic threats to the rule of law”. If no solution is found within the new EU rule of law framework, Article 7 will always remain the last resort to resolve the crisis and ensure compliance with European Union values.
Article 7, which was introduced in 1997 by the Treaty of Amsterdam, allows one third of states, the European Parliament or the European Commission to make an initial observation that there is a clear risk of a serious infringement by a member state of the values of the EU. The Council, which is made up of the states, then holds a hearing of the state in question. Acting unanimously (less the vote of the state in question), the governments must then confirm “a serious and persistent breach” of these values in that state. They can then “decide to suspend certain rights stemming from the application of the treaties for the member state in question, including the voting rights” of that state within the Council. Burdensome and complex to implement, this article has never been used.
Under the Commission's proposal, the new framework and its early warning mechanism would be activated in situations of a “systemic breakdown which adversely affects the integrity, stability and proper functioning of the institutions and mechanisms established at national level to secure the rule of law”, the Commission explains. The definition of the rule of law is based on the case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU and the European Court of Human Rights. This means that the criteria of a separation of powers, effective legal recourse and equality before the law must be present.
The framework will not apply in individual situations or isolated cases of breaches of fundamental rights or legal errors, the Commission states. It will follow three stages - initially, the Commission will gather and examine all relevant information and assess whether there are clear indications of a systemic threat to the rule of law. If the Commission then concludes that there is indeed a situation of systemic threat to the rule of law, it will initiate dialogue with the member state concerned, by sending its “rule of law opinion”, a warning. Secondly, if the problem persists, the Commission sends the member state a “rule of law recommendation”, which will be made public. Lastly, the Commission will monitor the follow-up given by the member state to the recommendation. If there is no satisfactory follow-up within the time limit set, the Commission can resort to one of the mechanisms set out in Article 7 of the TEU.
The Commission, assisted by experts from the Council of Europe, will be solely responsible for managing the mechanism as the only independent entity in a position to apply the treaties. “We are the objective arbitrator which is not a political body and which has no specific interests”, Viviane Reding told a press conference. This will not exclude dialogue with the member states for the entire length of the procedure, the Commission added. This communication is also “directly applicable”, according to Reding's staff. (SP)