As expected, it was not possible for the EU Council on Tuesday 19 November to adopt conclusions on the evaluation of the annual dialogue on the Rule of law. As Poland and Hungary continued to oppose the text and the various amendments made during the day, the Finnish Presidency therefore decided to propose Presidency conclusions by consensus among the 26 other Member States.
They were “widely supported, fortunately”, commented Finnish Minister for European Affairs Tytti Tuppurainen, who stressed that this annual dialogue should be seen above all as a way of “uniting” Member States on common values.
Poland and Hungary, two countries currently under the ‘Article 7’ procedure, had already expressed their disagreement on the wording and, in particular, the references to the 2014 Rule of law conclusions, which were not sufficiently explicit (see EUROPE 12370/9).
The Presidency’s final text is much more exhaustive and includes almost all the principles dear to both countries (equal treatment between Member States, respect for national political and constitutional traditions, respect for competences, etc.), but their opposition also concerned the role to be given to the Commission and its own evaluations in this future annual dialogue. This last question remained open on Tuesday and must continue to be discussed between Member States, the Minister acknowledged.
The Presidency’s Conclusions respond to the EU Council’s call in 2016 to assess the annual dialogue between Member States on the Rule of law, which has so far been organised around very specific themes, but which should change in nature due to the Commission’s new ambitions.
The Commission wants to launch an annual cycle on the Rule of law with the publication of annual reports in all Member States. The question for the Twenty-Eight is therefore to know what place to give to these reports country by country, which Poland and Hungary do not want to see become the main basis for the annual dialogues. In the Presidency’s draft conclusions, the aim at this stage is to “make use” of these reports in the dialogues, without further clarification.
These annual discussions should be more focused and observe key trends and developments in member countries. Without duplicating other instruments (Belgium and Germany have proposed a peer review mechanism), this dialogue will seek to anticipate possible problems.
Decision on a new hearing for Hungary on 20 November
The Minister also indicated that the decision on a second hearing for Hungary would be taken on 20 November by the Committee of Permanent Representatives. The first such exercise for Budapest was held in September, and only a handful of countries had spoken in favour of a second hearing. On Tuesday, there was no mention of these two Hungarian and Polish cases.
Link to the Presidency text: https://bit.ly/2O15Pxh (Original version in French by Solenn Paulic)