Can Slovakia still benefit fully from European funds? MEPs meeting in plenary session in Strasbourg on Wednesday 11 February debated the issue, amid growing concerns about an erosion of the Rule of law and the defence of European values within the country.
Michael McGrath, European Commissioner for Justice and the Rule of Law, reminded the House that Slovakia was the subject of several infringement proceedings.
Last November, amendments to Article 7 of the Slovak Constitution gave rise to “concerns” about respect for “the principles of primacy, autonomy, effectiveness and uniform application of Union law”.
In January, it was the amendments to the law on the protection of Whistleblowers that drew the Commission’s attention because of the infringements of their protection, confidentiality requirements and right to an effective remedy. “We consider that these changes infringe EU law”, said the Commissioner, who pointed out that Slovakia had until 2 March to respond to the letter of formal notice (https://aeur.eu/f/kox ).
These infringements concern fundamental principles of the European legal order, including the effectiveness of the law and judicial protection, directly affecting the guarantees underpinning the Rule of law in the EU.
“Respect for the Rule of law is an essential precondition for the implementation of the EU budget and compliance with the principle of sound financial management”, in the words of Marilena Raouna, Cypriot Deputy Minister for European Affairs, representing the Presidency of the EU Council, who explained the rationale behind the regulation on conditionality in terms of the Rule of law, a “non-punitive” but “preventive and protective” mechanism for the legal and responsible use of taxpayers’ money.
Concerned about the state of the Rule of law and the misuse of EU funds, a number of MEPs from a majority of groups ranging from the EPP to The Left have urged the European Commission to take action.
Poland’s Michał Wawrykiewicz (EPP) denounced a decline in the Rule of law, an “incredible level of corruption”, and called on the EU to “examine very closely” any possible violations. Daniel Freund (Greens/EFA, German) called for conditionality to be activated, citing a “serious risk” to the EU’s financial interests. Similarly, Konstantínos Arvanítis (The Left, Greek) said that this was “the ultimate defence of the Union”.
Lastly, Miriam Lexmann (EPP, Slovakian) called on the EU to act “where we have transferred powers to it”.
And Ľudovít Ódor (Renew Europe, Slovakian), for his part, pointed out that the citizens were not in the image of their leader, and that the majority remained attached to the EU.
All these arguments provoked a response from the radical right. Several elected representatives have denounced what they see as political interference by the EU. Following the example of Paolo Inselvini (ECR, Italian), some have denounced “ideological” pressure on Slovak societal choices - such as the recognition of two genders or restrictions on the rights of LGBTQI people -, brandishing the argument of sovereignty. (Original version in French by Nithya Paquiry)