Last month, the Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs adopted a report about the Fourth Amendment to the Hungarian Fundamental Law. Known as the Tavares Report after Rui Tavares, the member of the European Parliament who drafted it, the report – which has always been political, as I wrote in a previous post – was adopted on a party-line vote of the committee, and then sent on to be debated before the plenary. That debate, which was quite lively, took place yesterday in Strasbourg before today’s vote.

“The report being discussed here is a serious threat to Europe,” the prime minister said. “Not for Hungary. We are used to working against the wind. Your decision tomorrow represents a real threat to Europe’s future. The recommendation of the report violate the basic treaties of the EU because they attempt to establish an institution formerly not recognized by the treaties, an institution that would put one country of the European Union under monitoring and guardianship. This ignores the powers of the European Parliament, the functions distributed between the different EU institutions, and the legal balance between the member states and [the European] institutions.”

The Tavares Report, which may pass a vote of the parliament, attacks several changes the Hungarian government has carried out. What’s the problem with that? Two things: the content is political and, as the prime minister clearly stated, the procedure raises serious questions concerning violations of EU law.

On content, after the first draft of the Tavares document began circulating in early May, the Hungarian government issued a detailed position paper and then an array of MEPs – non-Hungarian and Hungarian – proposed more than 500 modifications to the draft. Most of these – even those that correct factual mistakes – were voted down by the left-wing majority of the committee.

But just as serious is the problem that, according to the EU’s own treaties, the European Parliament is not the body authorized to guard those treaties. That’s the European Commission’s job. And Hungary – as is entirely normal when a country undertakes so many legal changes during a period of reform – is engaged in an active and open discussion with the European Commission about new laws that may infringe upon EU laws. As a result of that back and forth, Hungary has even announced plans for a 5th Amendment to the Fundamental Law to tweak parts that have been criticized by the European Commission, a fact that Commission President José Manuel Barrosso himself pointed out yesterday when addressing the assembly.

Similarly, the Hungarian government requested an expert opinion from the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe, while firmly opposing the Council’s Monitoring Committee. The reason for that is simple: the Hungarian government is open to fact-based, rational debates within the relevant international forums but does not accept politically motivated debates in international bodies on what are Hungary’s internal matters. In these incidents, we see the Monitoring Committee and the European Parliament being exploited for short-term political interests.

In case of the Tavares Report, it would establish a monitoring committee that is nowhere to be found in the EU’s basic treaties and give that committee power over a member state, Hungary. That would set a precedent that the government of any EU member would contest. All of this despite the fact that the Hungarian government is carrying out a fruitful discussion with the Commission, the EU institution that does have the authority under the treaties to oversee legislative harmonization.

Meanwhile, we can’t overlook the irony that all of this is taking place at a time when the European Union, even the euro itself, is threatened by one of the most serious financial crises that the Union has seen. Yet Hungary, as the prime minister pointed out, is one of the few that has managed to get its deficit under control and bring down its debt.

“Hungarians have struggled hard to get over the situation we were left with at the beginning of the crisis,” Prime Minister Orbán said during the debate. “The Hungarian economy was falling apart before the Greek economy was. We survived only on credit lines from the IMF and the EU. Today, there are only two countries that have been able to pull themselves out of the credit programs. One is Hungary. Now, we finance ourselves from the markets. We feel we have done our homework.”

What we’re witnessing in the European Parliament in the debate yesterday and the vote today is remarkable, really. And as the prime minister himself emphasized, the matter is much bigger than Hungary. It’s about the future of the European Union.

Source: A Blog About Hungary

This opinion does not necessarily represent the views of this portal, your opinion is welcome too via info@xpatloop.com