In Brussels today, they only view countries which let migrants in as those governed by the rule of law. Those who protect their borders cannot qualify as countries where rule of law prevails. Once this proposal gets adopted, there will be no more obstacles to tying member states’ share of common funds to supporting migration and use financial means to blackmail countries which oppose migration.
Throughout the debate, Hungary has adhered to a policy of loyal cooperation, predictability and transparency, while always staying open to compromise. Even in spite of the fact that Hungary has never considered treating the economic fallback with joint loans as an adequate solution. The only reason we accepted the compromise in July was our dedication to European solidarity and our willingness to offer help so that fellow member states in financial need can secure the necessary funds as quickly as possible.
Hungary, in fact, is a dedicated follower of the rule of law. The leaders of the current governing parties were the people who fought out democracy in the face of the communist dictatorship. In the migration-related debates of recent years, rule of law has transitioned into a political and ideological weapon from a legal point of reference. Without objective criteria and possibility of legal remedy, no procedure that aims to penalize member states should be based on it.
In our view, tying economic and financial questions to political debates would be a grave mistake, one that would undermine Europe’s unity. Any new procedure aimed at penalizing member states should only be introduced with the unanimous amendment of the Treaties.
We request that fellow Member States consider and adhere to this requirement.
International Communications Office