THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION is taking Hungary to court over so-called ‘foreign influence’ laws that allegedly breach EU rules in a case that could be spearheaded by Ireland’s new commissioner.
Michael McGrath was recently appointed as the Commission with responsibility over the rule of law, justice and democracy in the next College. He is to appear before MEPs to answer outstanding questions about the role in November.
McGrath could oversee the case, announced this morning, that accuses Hungary of violating the “fundamental rights” of European citizens after Budapest introduced a law to investigate organisations and citizens who receive funding from outside of Hungary.
The European Commission has said it is looking to expedite the case and wants to resolve the matter “swiftly”. If the case runs into the coming year, McGrath could be tasked with taking charge of the legal battle into the next Commission’s term.
The law was introduced in December 2023 to much criticism as others in the EU pointed to its similarities with measures introduced by Russian President Vladimir Putin aiming to censor media that receives foreign funding after the invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
Under the measures, the Government has established what it calls an ‘Office for the Defence of Sovereignty’ that is tasked with investigating organisations – such as media companies and NGOs – and citizens in receipt of funding from outside of Hungary.
The aim of the office is to crack down on ‘foreign influence’, as it believes such funding could sway the results of elections – which have been largely contested by the EU for years – or “jeopardise the severity” of Hungary.
Some civil society organisations have expressed concern from inside Hungary too. The groups claim the political nature of the investigations could impact the outcome of the upcoming elections. Many activists have called for the law to be immediately suspended.
A spokesperson, during a press conference this afternoon in Brussels, detailed that the Commission is asking for the case to be expedited so that the issue is dealt with “swiftly”.
The Commission claims the Office is being empowered to conduct investigations in an “intrusive manner” and has also criticised the planned reporting structure as politicians will decide how best to respond to their findings.
As a result, the regulators have argued, the process will have negative consequences for those who are investigated or, more broadly, the freedom and fundamental rights of all citizens.
Hungary has roundly rejected these claims and have argued that the office and law do not breach EU law in any way. They have called the Commission’s concerns “unfounded”.
This court action is one of many disputes between Orbán and the EU since he took office in 2010.
The EU has previously withheld funding from Hungary over democratic freedom concerns. Leaders also expressed outrage over laws that banned the mentioning of homosexuality, proposed by Orbán’s far-right Fidesz party.
In return, Orbán has used his vote to impact the EU’s support for Ukraine and the expansion of the union.
Earlier this year new Fine Gael MEPs requested that Hungary be blocked from voting within the EU after Orbán made a surprise visit to Russia shortly after his government took its seat as chair of the Council.
Orbán also visited the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Chinese President Xi Jinping. The trips were denounced by European leadership as they claimed he had no right to do so under the treaties outlining the role of the Council presidency.
Fidesz also set up its own Fidesz populist, radical grouping in the Parliament after leaving their previous European Parliamentary grouping, the European People’s Party, following concerns over Orbán’s style of leadership at the time.
A recent Rule Of Law report also found that no progress had been made to enhance the rule of law under Orbán’s leadership in the last year.
Hungary also currently hold chair of the Council of the EU, where European ministers act as co-legislators with MEPs to pass new laws. Progressive legislation has been largely stalled during the country’s government’s term.
Asked today why the Commission didn’t first take intermediary actions against Hungary – rather than referring the case directly to the Court – a spokesperson told reporters that specific conditions will be set out in line in case law.
This, in short, could block the Office for the Defence of Sovereignty from conducting investigations until the matter has been resolved. A spokesperson declined to say how soon the case will be before a judge, referring questions to the Court.
The Journal has contacted Commissioner-delegate Michael McGrath for comment.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say