2018/0902R(NLE) | [ParlTrack]

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Expresses deep concern about the deliberate and systematic efforts of the Hungarian Government to undermine the founding values of the Union enshrined in Article 2 TEU, in particular through the removal of the constitutional checks and balances, by the limitation of the independence of the judiciary, by intentional alterations of the national electoral system and by hampering freedom of expression; highlights that these trends have substantially worsesome of the institutions of the EU to undermine the Treaties, in particular through the arbitrary use of the values enshrined sin~~ce the triggering of Article 7(1) TEU and have been severely amplified by the COVID-19 crisis~~ Article 2 TEU;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Deplores the fact that the constitutional balance in Hungary has continued to be significantly altered by a deliberately broad and instrumental use of cardinal laws and constitutional amendments aiming to entrench the issues which are to be regulated by ordinary legislation, with no or limited public consultation, in a very expedient manner, without any effective involvement of the opposition or civil society; highlights that such a trend is ~~contrary~~a threat to the rule of law, to constitutional traditions and to principles common to Member States and has been a source of open and consistent criticism by the EU ~~and by~~, the Council of Europe ~~institutions~~, the United Nations and the OSCE/ODIHR; denounces the excessive use of extraordinary powers with the declaration of the state of danger at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic;

Amendment 11 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Respects the equality of Member States before the Treaties as well as their national identities, inherent in their fundamental structures, political and constitutional, inclusive of regional and local self-government;

Amendment 12 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines that several recently adopted provisions in fundamental law or in cardinal acts aimed to curb the operational functioning of civil law institutions such as universities or to increase obstacles for political parties to be able to run a national list of candidates in the parliamentary elections; recalls that the OSCE decided to send a full-scale election observation mission to the 2022 Hungarian parliamentary elections because campaign finance legislation has remained largely unchanged and the latest amendments thereto have not addressed the recommendations of the ODIHR and GRECO;deleted

Amendment 13 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines that several recently adopted provisions in fundamental law or in cardinal acts aimed to curb the operational functioning of civil law institutions such as universities or to introduce unnecessary hurdles for making changes needed for an effective administration election, in particular by increasing obstacles for the parties to be able to run in a national list of candidates; insist that also practice adopting such laws shortly before the election is contrary to established practice and the recommendations of Venice Commission in its Rule of Law checklist; insist that on the other hand, the Hungarian government has pushed for expedient amendments without any consultation to several ordinary laws which had far-reaching negative impact on fundamental rights and right of equal treatment to increase obstacles for political parties to be able to run a national list of candidates in the parliamentary elections; recalls that the OSCE decided to send a full-scale election observation mission to the 2022 Hungarian parliamentary elections because campaign finance legislation has remained largely unchanged and the latest amendments thereto have not addressed the recommendations of the ODIHR and GRECO;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines that several recently adopted provisions in fundamental law or in cardinal acts aimed to curb the operational functioning of civil law institutions such as universities or to increase obstacles for political parties to be able to run a national list of candidates in the parliamentary elections, the main effect of which is to favour the incumbents1a; recalls that the OSCE/ODIHR decided to send a full-scale election observation mission to the 2022 Hungarian parliamentary elections because ~~campaign finance legislation has remained largely unchanged and the latest amendments thereto have not addressed the recommendations of the ODIHR and GRECO;~~ of concerns regarding general deterioration of conditions for democratic elections, and over the independence of judiciary and freedom of the media; recalls that the recommendations issued by OSCE/ODIHR following the 2018 parliamentary elections, as well as by GRECO, remain largely unaddressed. and new concerns have been indicated by the election observation mission on 4 April; _________________ 1a https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/docu ments/?pdf=CDL-AD(2021)039-e, paragraph 32

Amendment 15 #

Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA, Alin MITUȚA, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Charles GOERENS, Sandro GOZI, Anna Júlia DONÁTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Stresses that in its Statement of Preliminary Findings and Preliminary Conclusions, the OSCE election observation mission to the 2022 Hungarian parliamentary elections 1b found that while the elections offered voters distinct alternatives and were well run, the process was marred by the pervasive overlapping of government and ruling coalition’s messaging that blurred the line between state and party, as well as by media bias and opaque campaign funding; _________________ 1b https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/4/6 /515111.pdf

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Draws attention that the Hungarian elections were held on 3 April 2022 without addressing recommendations of the ODIHR and GRECO related to campaign finance legislation what negatively affected the transparency and accountability of campaign finances;

Amendment 17 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Expresses concern about the steps the Hungarian Government has taken to further limit the independence of the judiciary, in particular by weakening the powers of the National Judicial Council, which damages mutual trust Takes note of the internal judicial reforms in Hungary, stressing th~~e EU, as national judg~~at these are judges of first instance of EU law and guarantee equality between EU citizens; highlights, furthermore, that the Hungarian Government increasingly relies on the Hungarian Constitutional Court to avoid compliance with the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), thereby undermining the primacy of EU lawmatters that fall within the exclusive competence of the Member State;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Expresses concern about the steps the Hungarian Government has taken to further limit the independence of the judiciary, in particular by weakening the powers of the National Judicial Council~~, which damages~~ by modifying appointment procedure, and increasing administrative powers of president of the Supreme Court which takes place entirely without judicial involvement; recalls that the integrity and independence of judicial system is essential source and lack of it will damage mutual trust in the EU, as national judges are judges of first instance of EU law and guarantee equality between EU citizens through its uniform application; highlights, furthermore, that the Hungarian Government increasingly relies on the Hungarian Constitutional Court to avoid compliance with the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), thereby undermining the primacy of EU law;

Amendment 19 #

Laura HUHTASAARI, Gerolf ANNEMANS, Gunnar BECK, Gilles LEBRETON, Jaak MADISON

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Expresses concern about the steps the Hungarian Government has taken to further limit the independence~~Recalls that the fact that the Hungarian Government relies ofn the judiciary, in particular by weakening the powers of the National Judicial Council, which damages mutual trust in the EU, as national judges are judges of first instance of EU law and guarantee equality between EU citizens; highlights, furthermore, that the Hungarian Government increasingly relies on the Hungarian Constitutional Court to avoid compliance with the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), thereby undermining the primacy of EU lawHungarian Constitutional Court without seeking compliance with the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) is legitimate use of state sovereignty, which is in compliance with the EU treaties; further recalls that the principle of primacy of EU law has no basis in the EU treaties except for the normative ambiguous Declaration 17 to the Treaty on European Union;

Amendment 2 #

Laura HUHTASAARI, Gerolf ANNEMANS, Gunnar BECK, Gilles LEBRETON, Jaak MADISON

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Expresses deep concern about the deliberate and systematic efforts of the Hungarian Government to undermine the founding values of the Union enshrined in Article 2 TEU, in particular through the removal of the constitutional checks and balances, by the limitation of the independence of the judiciary, by intentional alteratirection to which the whole European Union is heading due to unfounded and politically motivated attacks against the Member States, which oppose the mainstream visions of the ~~national electoral system and by hampering freedom of expression; highlights that these trends have substantially worsene~~EU as an ever closer federal supra-national state, and defend the sovereignty and sin~~ce the triggering of Article 7(1) TEU and have been severely amplified by the COVID-19 crisi~~dependence of the Member States;

Amendment 20 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Expresses concern about the steps the Hungarian Government has taken to further limit the independence of the judiciary, in particular by weakening the powers of the National Judicial Council, which damages mutual trust in the EU, as national judges are judges of ~~first instance of~~ EU law and guarantee equality between EU citizens; highlights, furthermore, that the Hungarian Government increasingly relies on the Hungarian Constitutional Court to avoid compliance with the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), thereby undermining the primacy of EU law;

Amendment 21 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4 a. Expresses deep concern about the systemic misuse of public funds from the national and EU budget to the benefit of members of the government and affiliated circles; reiterates that the EU’s Anti-fraud Office (OLAF) found the ratio of irregular payments in Hungary in the areas of European Structural and Investment Funds and Agriculture between 2015 and 2019 to be more than ten times higher than EU average; further notes that in 2019, the Commission imposed financial corrections of around 1 billion EUR on Hungary after having found systemic irregularities in the procurement system, which constitutes the highest correction in the EU in the 2014- 2020 financial period; recalls that the Council of Europe’s Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) in its 2020 report labelled the Hungarian government’s compliance with its recommendations as “globally unsatisfactory”1c; notes that some new high-level cases involving politicians were opened since 2020, however the track record of investigations of allegations concerning high-level officials and their immediate circle remains limited1d; notes that companies close to the government won 21% of the value of all public tenders in 2019 and 27% of the value of all public tenders in 20201e; _________________ 1c Group of States Against Corruption (GRECO), Council of Europe. Fourth Evaluation Round, Corruption Prevention in Respect Of Members Of Parliament, Judges And Prosecutors, Second Interim Compliance Report, 17.11.2020, Greco RC4(2020)10. 1d https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:5202 1SC0714&from=EN , p.12 1e Corruption Research Center Budapest, New Trends in Corruption Risk and Intensity of Competition in the Hungarian Public Procurement from January 2005 to April 2020, available at www.crcb. eu/wp- content/uploads/2020/05/2020_hpp_0520_ flash_report _1_200526_.pdf, page 10

Amendment 22 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4 b. Regrets the lack of proper follow up to its reasoned proposal calling on the Council to determine, pursuant to Article 7(1) of the TEU, the existence of a clear risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the values on which the Union is founded; stresses the high thresholds needed for the activation and use of this provision in the Council and the political considerations influencing the procedure;

Amendment 23 #

Paulo RANGEL, Vladimír BILČÍK, Othmar KARAS, Seán KELLY, Nathalie COLIN-OESTERLÉ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Insists that the Council’s constitutional obligation to organise hearings, enshrined in Article 7(1) TEU, should be implemented in an open, regular and structured manner; insists that in all proceedings related to Article 7 TEU, Parliament and the Commission should be treated equally; points in that regard that the institutional responsibility of the Parliament in triggering Article 7 procedure and principle of mutual sincere cooperation between the EU institutions enshrined in Article 13(2) TEU which should ensure its participation rights in all aspects of the Article 7 procedures; calls on the Council to systematically provide the Member State concerned with recommendations, and to oversee the implementation thereof on a regular basis, following the hearings under Article 7 TEU; recalls that the Council has the obligation to regularly reassess the situation in the Member State concerned and may lift a determination if it finds that the grounds do not longer apply;

Amendment 24 #

Laura HUHTASAARI, Gerolf ANNEMANS, Gunnar BECK, Gilles LEBRETON, Jaak MADISON

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Insists that the Council’s constitutional obligation to organise hearings, enshrined in Article 7(1) TEU, should be implemented in an open, regular and structured manner; insists that in all proceedings related to Article 7 TEU, Parliament and the Commission shoulEU institutions terminate proceedings under Article 7(1) TEU due to the fact that it results in interference in internal affairs of a sovereign and independent state, which is contrary to public international law; recalls that according to the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co- operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, adopted bey treated equally; calls on the Council to systematically provide the Member State concerned with recommendations, and to oversee the implementation thereof on a regular basis, following the hearings under Article 7 TEU; he UN General Assembly on 24 October 1970 (resolution 26/25 (XXV))1a, "[n]o state or group of states has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the internal or external affairs of any other state", and that "interference or attempted threats against the personality of the state or against its political, economic and cultural elements, are in violation of international law"; _________________ 1a https://www.un.org/ruleoflaw/files/3dda1f 104.pdf

Amendment 25 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Insists that the Council’s constitutional obligation to organise hearings, enshrined in Article 7(1) TEU, should be implemented in an open, regular and structured manner; regrets therefore that the Council, invoking the COVID-19 pandemic, and the impossibility to hold physical Council meetings, only organised two hearings under Article 7 TEU since December 2019; insists that in all proceedings related to Article 7 TEU, Parliament and the Commission should be treated equally; calls on the Council to systematically provide the Member State concerned with recommendations including deadlines, and to oversee the implementation thereof on a regular basis, following the hearings under Article 7 TEU;

Amendment 26 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Insists that the Council’s constitutional obligation to organise hearings, enshrined in Article 7(1) TEU, should be implemented in an open, regular and structured manner; regrets that so far this has not been the case; insists that in all proceedings related to Article 7(1) TEU, Parliament and the Commission should be treated equally; calls on the Council to systematically provide the Member State concerned with recommendations, and to oversee the implementation thereof on a regular basis, following the hearings under Article 7(1) TEU; urges the Council to immediately address recommendations to Hungary;

Amendment 27 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. ~~Insist~~Underlines that the Council’s has a constitutional obligation ~~to organise hearings~~, enshrined in Article 7(1) TEU, ~~should be implemen~~to hear the Member Stated in ~~an open, regular and structured manner; in~~question and not to organize endless hearings; emphasistes that in all proceedings related to Article 7 TEU, Parliament and the Commission should be treated equally; calls on the Council to systematically provide the Member State concerned with recommendations, and to oversee the implementation thereof on a regular basis, following the hearings under Article 7 TEUit is the Council that has a leading role and other institutions may only be present in it if the Treaty allows for it; calls on the Council to promptly conclude all the Article 7 TEU procedures with a vote;

Amendment 28 #

Paulo RANGEL, Vladimír BILČÍK, Othmar KARAS, Seán KELLY, Nathalie COLIN-OESTERLÉ

5 a. Expresses its deep concern that the standard modalities for hearings referred to in Article 7(1) of the TEU do not ensure the same treatment for Parliament as for the Commission and one third of the Member States for the purposes of presenting the reasoned proposal; recalls that Article 7(1) of the TEU provides for equal rights and procedural status for one third of the Member States, Parliament and the Commission with regard to triggering the procedure; insists that Parliament’s invitation to a formal Council meeting is still owing on the basis of the right of initiative and the principle of sincere cooperation between institutions enshrined in Article 4(3) of the TEU; reiterates its call on the Council to keep Parliament promptly and fully informed at every stage of the procedure;

Amendment 29 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Recalls that only qualified majority is required to determine that there is a clear risk of a serious breach by a Member State of the values referred to in Article 2; notes that the failure to progress in Article 7 TEU procedure enables continued divergence from the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU, undermining those values and mutual trust between Member States and the EU as a whole; urges the French presidency of the Council to take the appropriate steps in order to move further the procedure under Article7(1) TEU;

Amendment 3 #

Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Włodzimierz CIMOSZEWICZ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Expresses deep concern about the deliberate and systematic efforts of the Hungarian Government to undermine the founding values of the Union enshrined in Article 2 TEU, in particular through the removal of the constitutional checks and balances, by the limitation of the independence of the judiciary, by intentional alterations of the national electoral system and by hampering freedom of expression, academic freedoms, media pluralism and media Independence, and by challenging the right to equal treatment as well as rights of migrants and asylum seekers; highlights that these trends have substantially worsened since the triggering of Article 7(1) TEU and have been severely amplified by the COVID-19 crisis;

Amendment 30 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Underlines that the implementation of Article 7(1) TEU does not require unanimity and acknowledges Council´s refusal to vote following this provision to determine that there is a "clear risk of a serious violation" to the founding values of the Union;

Amendment 31 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5 b. Points out that the failure by the Council to make effective use of Article 7 of the TEU continues to undermine the integrity of common European values, mutual trust, and the credibility of the Union as a whole; reiterates its position on its own proposal calling on the Council to determine, pursuant to Article 7(1) of the TEU, the existence of a clear risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the values on which the Union is founded; calls on the Commission to make full use of the tools available to address a clear risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the values on which the Union is founded, in particular expedited infringement procedures and applications for interim measures before the Court of Justice;

Amendment 32 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Welcomes the judgment of the CJEU in cases C-156/21 and C-157/21 of 16 February 2022, which confirms the validity of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation, as it is based on an appropriate legal basis and is compatible with the procedure laid down in Article 7 TEU; insist that application of the conditionality Regulation is a tool complementary to Article 7 procedure, is directly applicable in all Member States and enforceable since January 2021 and calls on the Commission to undertake all the necessary actions for its effective enforcement; points with concern with regard to the protection of the EU budget to the recent amendments to laws narrowing the scope of application of public procurement rules in Hungary leading to reduced scrutiny and increased risk of corruption; points furthermore to a clear lack of cooperation with OLAF, as well as failures to recover of amounts due from economic operators which committed irregularity or fraud;

Amendment 33 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

Amendment 34 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Welcom~~Notes the judgments of the CJEU in cases C-156/21 and C-157/21 of 16 February 2022, which confirms the validity of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation~~, a~~; notes wit ~~is based on an appropriate legal basis a~~h concern that the CJEU is one of the institutions that take opportunities to extend its ~~compatible with the procedure laid down in Article 7 TEU~~powers beyond those conferred by the Treaties;

Amendment 35 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Reiterates that approval of the national plans under the Recovery and Resilience Facility should be made conditional on the fulfilment of all 11 criteria set out in Article 19 of and Annex V to the regulation on the Recovery and Resilience Facility; expects the Commission to exclude all risks of programmes under cohesion policy contributing to the misuse of EU funds or to breaches of the rule of law before approving the partnership agreements and cohesion policy programmes; calls on the Commission to apply the Common Provisions Regulation and the Financial Regulation more stringently in order to tackle the discriminatory use of EU funds, in particular any use of a politically motivated nature;

Amendment 36 #

Paulo RANGEL, Vladimír BILČÍK, Othmar KARAS, Seán KELLY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6 a. Salutes the decision of the European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to launch the Rule of Law Conditionality mechanism against Hungary; Regrets however that this decision was taken with significant delay;

Amendment 37 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Insists that legitimacy of the EU’s action on the rule of law needs to be underpinned by a coherent, effective and visible EU annual rule of law monitoring cycle, which should also integrate procedures under Article 7 TEU and under the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation; calls on the Council and the Commission to respond without delay to Parliament’s requests to negotiate an interinstitutional agreement under Article 295 TFEU framing such a mechanism;deleted

Amendment 38 #

Paulo RANGEL, Vladimír BILČÍK, Othmar KARAS, Seán KELLY, Nathalie COLIN-OESTERLÉ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Insists that legitimacy~~Takes the view that the latest developments in the ongoing hearings under Article 7(1) of the TEU~~’s action on the rule of law needs to be und~~ once again underline the imminent need for an EU mechanism on democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights (DRF), as proposed by Parliament, in the form of an interpin~~ned by~~stitutional agreement including a coherent, effective and visible EU annual ~~rule of law~~DRF monitoring cycle, which should also ~~integrate~~take into account procedures under Article 7 TEU and under the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation; reiterates that the mechanism must complement and reinforce, rather than substitute, the ongoing and future proceedings under Article 7 of the TEU; calls on the Council and the Commission to re~~spond~~assess without delay t~~o Parliament’s requests~~heir reluctance to negotiate an interinstitutional agreement under Article 295 TFEU framing such a mechanism;

Amendment 39 #

Laura HUHTASAARI, Gerolf ANNEMANS, Gunnar BECK, Gilles LEBRETON, Jaak MADISON

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Insists~~Points out that legitimacy of the EU’s action on the rule of law needs to be underpinned by a coherent, effective and visible EU annual rule of law monitoring cycle, which should also integrate procedures under Article 7 TEU and under the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation; calls on the Council and the Commission to respond without delay to Parliament’s requests to negotiate an interinstitutional agreement under Article 295 TFEU framing such a mechanism suffers from actions that create tensions and erode unity between the Member States e.g. from procedures under Article 7 TEU and under the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation; calls on the Council and the Commission to terminate aforementioned proceedings;

Amendment 4 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Expresses deep concern about the deliberate and systematic efforts of the Hungarian Government to undermine the founding values of the Union enshrined in Article 2 TEU, in particular through the removal of the constitutional checks and balances, by the limitation of the independence of the judiciary, by intentional alterations of the national electoral system and by hampering freedom of expression, education and academic freedom as well as university autonomy; highlights that these trends have substantially worsened since the triggering of Article 7(1) TEU and have been severely amplified by the COVID-19 crisis;

Amendment 40 #

Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA, Alin MITUȚA, Sophia IN 'T VELD, Charles GOERENS, Sandro GOZI, Anna Júlia DONÁTH

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Draws attention to the consequences of the war in Ukraine and the need for immediate responses from Member States. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the need for immediate responses does not lead to unnecessary flexibility and reduced impact of the instruments for upholding the rule of law in the Union, pursuant to both Article 7 TEU and the budgetary conditionality regulation;

Amendment 41 #

Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Włodzimierz CIMOSZEWICZ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Takes note of the recommendations adopted by the Citizens Panel 2 on “European democracy, values and rights and security” in the Conference on the Future of Europe and in particular the number 10 and 11, including the extension of the conditionality mechanism to cover “all violations of the rule of law;

Amendment 42 #

Domènec RUIZ DEVESA, Włodzimierz CIMOSZEWICZ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7 b. Calls to reform the Treaty to remove the unanimity decision-making in the implementation of Article 7(2) in favour of majority in Council to “determine the existence of a serious and persistent breach by a Member State of the values referred in Article 2" TEU;

Amendment 43 #

Paulo RANGEL, Vladimír BILČÍK, Othmar KARAS, Seán KELLY, Nathalie COLIN-OESTERLÉ

~~8. Takes note of the recent parliamentary elections in Hungary and insists that any Hungarian government~~ delected ~~remains responsible for eliminating the risk of serious breaches of EU values.~~

Amendment 44 #

Paulo RANGEL, Vladimír BILČÍK, Othmar KARAS, Seán KELLY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Takes note of the recent parliamentary elections in Hungary and insists that ~~any~~the Hungarian government ~~elected~~ remains responsible for eliminating the risk of serious breaches of EU values.;

Amendment 45 #

Laura HUHTASAARI, Gerolf ANNEMANS, Gunnar BECK, Gilles LEBRETON, Jaak MADISON

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Takes note of the recent parliamentary elections in Hungary and ~~insists that any Hungarian government elected remains responsible for eliminating the risk of serious breaches of EU values.~~totally respects their legitimate and democratic outcome;

Amendment 46 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. Thoroughly condemns the criticism of the re-elected Prime Minister of Hungary of the President of Ukraine and deplores the increasing ties of Hungary with Russia, given the invasion of Ukraine by the latter;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Expresses deep concern about the deliberate and systematic efforts of the Hungarian Government to undermine the founding values of the Union enshrined in Article 2 TEU, in particular through the removal of the constitutional checks and balances, by the limitation of the independence of the judiciary, by intentional alterations of the national electoral system and by hampering freedom of expression and other fundamental rights; highlights that these trends have substantially worsened since the triggering of Article 7(1) TEU and have been severely amplified by the COVID-19 crisis;

Amendment 6 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Insists on the need to avoid the creation of a hierarchy of EU values; stresses that it is important to ensure that not only the rule of law, but also other Union values, including a wider spectrum of fundamental rights and democracy are properly assessed;

Amendment 7 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Deplores the fact that the constitutional balance in Hungary has continued to be significantly altered by a deliberately broad and instrumental use of cardinal laws and constitutional amendments aiming to entrench the issues which are to be regulated by ordinary legislation, with no or limited public consultation, in a very expedient manner, without any effective involvement of the opposition or civil society; highlights that such a trend is contrary to the rule of law, to constitutional traditions and to principles common to Member States and has been a source of open and consistent criticism by the EU and by the Council of Europe institutions; denounces the excessive use of extraordinary powers with the declaration of the state of danger at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic;deleted

Amendment 8 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Recalls that the rule of law does not mean rule by law, but is underlined by the principle of legality, implying a transparent, accountable, democratic and pluralistic process of enacting laws; Deplores the fact that the constitutional balance in Hungary has continued to be significantly altered by a deliberately broad and instrumental use of cardinal laws and constitutional amendments aiming to entrench the issues which are to be regulated by ordinary legislation, through amendments of constitutional level, with no or limited public consultation, in a very expedient manner, without any effective involvement of the opposition or civil society; highlights that such a trend of locking in issues at the constitutional level is problematic with regard to both the Constitution and ordinary laws, is contrary to the rule of law, to constitutional traditions and to principles common to Member States and has been a source of open and consistent criticism by the EU and by the Council of Europe institutions; denounces the excessive use of extraordinary powers with the declaration of the state of danger at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic without limitation and with full discretionary powers granted to the government to extend or terminate it and with including a capacity for the government to set aside any law by a simple executive decree and insists that any such measures should remain necessary and proportionate and with relevant constitutional guarantees for their legislative oversight;

Amendment 9 #

Laura HUHTASAARI, Gerolf ANNEMANS, Gunnar BECK, Gilles LEBRETON, Jaak MADISON

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Deplores the fact that the~~Regards that constitutional ~~balance in~~changes that Hungary has ~~continued to be significantly altered by a deliberately broad and instrumental use of cardinal laws and constitutional amendments aiming to entrench the issues which are to be~~approved during the last decade are a regsul~~ated by ordinary legislation, with no or l~~t of a legitimiate~~d public consultation, in~~ use of a govery expedient manner, without any effective involvement of the opposition or civil society; highlights that such a trend is contrary to the rule of law, to constitutional traditions and to principles common to Member States and has been a source of open and consistent criticism by the EU and by the Council of Europe institutions; denounces the excessive use of extraordinary powers with the declaration of the state of danger at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemicning majority received in democratic elections, if and to the extent to which the Hungarian Constitutional Court has upheld them or, at any rate, not questioned them constitutionally;

source: 729.938

2022/06/01 LIBE 230 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1

— having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU), and in particular Articles 2, 4(3) and 7(1) thereof,

Amendment 10 #

Ramona STRUGARIU, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Moritz KÖRNER, Malik AZMANI, Abir AL-SAHLANI, Olivier CHASTEL, Anna Júlia DONÁTH, Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities, as set out in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and as reflected in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and embedded in international human rights treaties, and whereas those values, which are common to the Member States ~~and to which all Member States have freely subscribed,~~ constitute the foundation of the rights enjoyed by those living in the Union;

Amendment 100 #

Bettina VOLLATH, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pietro BARTOLO, Evin INCIR, Łukasz KOHUT, Giuliano PISAPIA, Klára DOBREV

Motion for a resolution
Recital L c (new)

Lc. Whereas Hungary’s government disregards systematically the European supremacy principle of the role of the EU Court of Justice, but itself employs the EU Court of Justice when it comes to bringing actions against existing European laws.

Amendment 101 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L d (new)

Ld. whereas there is increasing expert consensus that Hungary is no longer a democracy; whereas according to the University of Gothenburg V-Dem Democracy Index 2019, Hungary became the EU’s first ever authoritarian Member State; whereas Hungary was identified as a “hybrid regime,” having lost its status as a “semi-consolidated democracy” in the 2020 Freedom House Nations in Transit Report; whereas Hungary is rated as a "flawed democracy" and ranks 56 out of 167 countries (one position below its 2020 ranking) in the Economist Intelligence Unit’s 2022 Democracy Index; whereas according to the V-Dem Democracy Index 2022, among the Union members, Hungary and Poland are among the top autocratizers in the world over the last decade;

Amendment 102 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L d (new)

Ld. Whereas on 20 January 2020, in its judgment in Magyar Kétfarkú Kutya Párt v. Hungary, the ECtHR found that there had been a violation of the freedom of expression regarding penalising for providing apolitical party’s mobile application which allowed voters to photograph, anonymously upload and comment on invalid votes cast during a referendum on immigration in 2016; whereas the supervision of the execution of that judgment is still pending;

Amendment 103 #

Bettina VOLLATH, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pietro BARTOLO, Evin INCIR, Łukasz KOHUT, Birgit SIPPEL, Giuliano PISAPIA

Motion for a resolution
Recital L d (new)

Ld. Whereas blocking sanctions against Russia in the Council undermines the Union's own ability to act as a whole and constitutes a security problem for the European Union.

Amendment 104 #

Ramona STRUGARIU, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Moritz KÖRNER, Malik AZMANI, Abir AL-SAHLANI, Olivier CHASTEL, Anna Júlia DONÁTH, Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA

Motion for a resolution
Recital L e (new)

Le. whereas the Hungarian government continued attacks on academic freedoms; whereas on 31st of August 2020 the management of Hungary’s prestigious University of Theatre and Film Arts (SZFE) resigned in protest over the imposition of a government-appointed board; whereas a law passed by parliament in 2020 had transferred the ownership of the state-run theatre school to a private foundation whose members have close links to the Orban government; whereas the Ministry of Technology and Innovation appointed five members to the new board of trustees, rejecting members proposed by the university’s senate; whereas in recent years the actions of the government aimed at exerting control over academia and sciences in an effort to root out teaching or scientific research that counter the government’s conservative agenda; whereas another example in this regard is stripping the Academy of Sciences of its autonomy through the controversial bill adopted in July 2019; whereas the EU should act more forcefully in order to safeguard the autonomy of universities in Hungary;

Amendment 105 #

Bettina VOLLATH, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pietro BARTOLO, Evin INCIR, Łukasz KOHUT, Birgit SIPPEL, Giuliano PISAPIA

Motion for a resolution
Recital L e (new)

Le. Whereas the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has overturned significant parts of Hungary's asylum law in various rulings - most recently on 17 December 2020 - and Hungary has been condemned for pushbacks of asylum seekers and Frontex has had to cancel joint operations due to the fundamental rights violations found by the ECJ

Amendment 106 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L e (new)

Le. Whereas on 23 March 2020, in his statement the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media expressed his concerns about provisions of the coronavirus response draft bill in Hungary that could negatively impact the work of the media reporting on the pandemic;

Amendment 107 #

Ramona STRUGARIU, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Moritz KÖRNER, Malik AZMANI, Abir AL-SAHLANI, Olivier CHASTEL, Anna Júlia DONÁTH, Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA

Motion for a resolution
Recital L f (new)

Lf. whereas two thirds of the 33 public interest asset management foundations performing public duties (KEKVAs) that have been created by the end of 2021 will manage higher education institutions previously run by the state; whereas civil society and Hungarian independent intellectuals have warned against the massive privatisation in the field of higher education and the threat it poses for freedom of research and teaching;

Amendment 108 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L f (new)

Lf. Whereas on 26 May2020, in its judgment in Mándli and Others v. Hungary, the ECtHR found a violation of the freedom of expression regarding the suspension of the applicants’ Parliament accreditation as journalists; whereas the supervision of the execution of that judgment remain spending;

Amendment 109 #

Bettina VOLLATH, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pietro BARTOLO, Evin INCIR, Łukasz KOHUT, Giuliano PISAPIA

Motion for a resolution
Recital L f (new)

Lf. Whereas Hungary did not agree to the application of the common Temporary Protection Directive on 3 March 2022, but the first application was decided by a two- thirds majority and thus Hungary must also comply with its provisions.

Amendment 11 #

Ramona STRUGARIU, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Moritz KÖRNER, Malik AZMANI, Abir AL-SAHLANI, Olivier CHASTEL, Anna Júlia DONÁTH, Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas it is apparent from Article 49 TEU, which provides the possibility for any European State to apply to become a member of the European Union, the European Union is composed of States which have freely and voluntarily committed themselves to the common values referred to in Article 2 TEU, which respect those values and which undertake to promote them, EU law being based on the fundamental premiss that each Member State shares with all the other Member States, and recognises that those Member States share with it, those same values 1a _________________ 1a Judgement of 24 June 2019, European Commission v Republic of Poland, C- 619/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:531, paragraph 42

Amendment 110 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L g (new)

Lg. whereas on 15 June 2021, the Hungarian Parliament adopted a law originally intended to fight paedophilia, which, following amendments proposed by Members from the ruling Fidesz party, contains clauses prohibiting the portrayal of homosexuality and gender- reassignment to minors; whereas the law prohibits homosexuality and gender reassignment from being featured in sex education classes, and stipulates that such classes can now only be taught by registered organisations; whereas changes to the Business Advertising Law and to the Media Law require that adverts and content featuring LGBTI people must be rated as Category V (i.e. not recommended for minors); whereas the association of sexual orientation and gender identity with criminal acts such paedophilia is unacceptable and leads to further discrimination and stigmatisation of sexual minorities;

Amendment 111 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L g (new)

Lg. Whereas on 30 March 2021, in her Memorandum on freedom of expression and media freedom in Hungary, the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe indicated that the combined effects of apolitically controlled media regulatory authority and sustained and distorting state intervention in the media market have eroded the conditions for media pluralism and the freedom of expression in Hungary, and free political debate and the free exchange of diverse opinions, which are the prerequisites for democratic societies to thrive, have been severely curtailed, particularly outside the capital;

Amendment 112 #

Bettina VOLLATH, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pietro BARTOLO, Evin INCIR, Łukasz KOHUT, Giuliano PISAPIA

Motion for a resolution
Recital L g (new)

Lg. Whereas on 02.06.2021 the two third majority in the Hungarian government has decided not to participate in the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO) or the strengthened cooperation among EU prosecutors and that therefore the European Public Prosecutor's Office is not allowed to enter the country, thus hindering the investigation and prevention of corruption.

Amendment 113 #

Ramona STRUGARIU, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Moritz KÖRNER, Malik AZMANI, Abir AL-SAHLANI, Olivier CHASTEL, Anna Júlia DONÁTH, Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA

Motion for a resolution
Recital L h (new)

Lh. whereas civil society, and especially public interest non- governmental organizations (NGOs), have been facing increasing pressure in Hungary; whereas, although the government repealed the bill previously declared incompatible with EU law by the ECJ, according to the new law, these organizations can now be subjected to regular financial inspections by the State Audit Office; whereas civil society organizations are concerned that the Audit Office, whose main function is to monitor the use of public funds, not private donations, will be used to put more pressure on them; whereas civil society organisations have warned that with the new NGO law, the state interferes with the autonomy of association of organisations established on the basis of the right of association, the privacy of citizens who stand up for public interest and that it is detrimental to the exercise of freedom of expression and to the democratic public as a whole;

Amendment 114 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L h (new)

Lh. Whereas on 22 November 2021, in her statement following the visit to Hungary the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression indicated that Hungary’s interventions in the media sector over the past decade could create risks for human rights in the upcoming elections, and by exerting influence over media regulatory bodies, providing substantial state funds to support pro-government media, facilitating the expansion and development of media that follow a pro- government editorial line, and ostracizing media outlets and journalists reporting critically on the government, the authorities have proactively reshaped the media sector and in their efforts to create “balance” have undermined media diversity, pluralism and independence;

Amendment 115 #

Bettina VOLLATH, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pietro BARTOLO, Evin INCIR, Łukasz KOHUT, Giuliano PISAPIA

Motion for a resolution
Recital L h (new)

Lh. Recalls the joint statement of the presidents of the Hungarian and Romanian Constitutional Courts, Péter Paczolay and Augustin Zegrean, on the occasion of a meeting of the members of the two institutions, on 16 May 2013 in Eger, which emphasized the special responsibility of constitutional courts in countries governed by a 2/3 majority.

Amendment 116 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L i (new)

Li. Whereas on 4 April 2022, in the Statement of Preliminary Findings and Conclusions following the Parliamentary Elections and Referendum, the OSCE international election observation mission stated that the bias and lack of balance in monitored news coverage and the absence of debates between major contestants significantly limited the voters’ opportunity to make an informed choice;

Amendment 117 #

Bettina VOLLATH, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pietro BARTOLO, Evin INCIR, Łukasz KOHUT, Birgit SIPPEL, Giuliano PISAPIA, Klára DOBREV

Motion for a resolution
Recital L i (new)

Li. Whereas the systematic dismantling of the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights has enormously restricted the space for opposition parties and civil society, leaving no social dialogue and consultation mechanism with civil society organisations, trade unions and interest groups

Amendment 118 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L j (new)

Lj. Whereas on 8 April 2022, the Hungarian National Election Office considered that the nationwide NGO campaign urging people to vote invalid in the referendum regarding children’s access to information concerning sexual orientation and gender identity issues was unlawful, and imposed fines on 16 different Hungarian NGOs participating in the referendum campaign;

Amendment 119 #

Bettina VOLLATH, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pietro BARTOLO, Evin INCIR, Łukasz KOHUT, Giuliano PISAPIA, Klára DOBREV

Motion for a resolution
Recital L j (new)

Lj. Whereas the government's restrictions on civil society have destroyed the social dialogue and consultation mechanism with civil society organisations, trade unions and interest groups, calls on the Hungarian government to make every effort to strengthen the social dialogue and broad consultation mechanism and to guarantee the rights associated with it.

Amendment 12 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas that premiss implies and justifies the existence of mutual trust between the Member States that those values will be recognised and, therefore, that the law of the EU that implements them will be respected 2a; _________________ 2a Opinion of the Court of 18 December 2014, Opinion pursuant to Article 218(11) TFEU, 2/13, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2454, paragraph 168

Amendment 120 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L k (new)

Lk. Whereas on 6 October 2020, in Case C-66/18 Commission v Hungary (Enseignement supérieur), the CJEU ruled that by adopting the measures provided for in Article 76(1)(a) and (b) of Law No CCIV of 2011 on national higher education, as amended, Hungary has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 13, Article 14(3) and Article 16 of the Charter, Article 49 TFEU and Article 16 of Directive 2006/123/EC on services in the internal market, as well the World Trade Organization law;

Amendment 121 #

Bettina VOLLATH, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pietro BARTOLO, Evin INCIR, Łukasz KOHUT, Giuliano PISAPIA, Klára DOBREV

Motion for a resolution
Recital L k (new)

Lk. Recalls the expulsion of the Central European University (CEU) from Budapest and condemns the constant attacks on academic freedom, such as the ban on gender studies in university curricula.

Amendment 122 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L l (new)

Ll. Whereas on 2 July 2021, in its opinion on the constitutional amendments adopted by the Hungarian Parliament in December 2020, the Venice Commission considered that Article 7 of the Ninth Amendments relating to Article 38 of the Constitution and introducing in the Fundamental Law the “public interest asset management foundations performing public duties” should be reconsidered; these foundations should rather be regulated by statutory law, clearly setting out all relevant duties of transparency and accountability for the management of their funds (public and private), as well as appropriate safeguards of independence for the composition and functioning of the board of trustees; whereas the Venice Commission also mentioned that these laws should take into account the significant role of universities as places of freethought and argumentation, providing for all due measures to guarantee the proper safeguard of academic independence and institutional autonomy;

Amendment 123 #

Bettina VOLLATH, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pietro BARTOLO, Evin INCIR, Łukasz KOHUT, Birgit SIPPEL, Giuliano PISAPIA, Klára DOBREV

Motion for a resolution
Recital L l (new)

Ll. Whereas in Hungary independent journalists, media owners and politicians had the Pegasus software downloaded onto their mobile phones without their knowledge, and the fact that pro- government media in Hungary hardly reported on Pegasus, illustrates the restriction of freedom of assembly and the right to privacy.

Amendment 124 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L m (new)

Lm. Whereas on 22 November 2021, in her statement following the visit to Hungary the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression urged the authorities to effectively protect academic freedom and respect the rights of professors and students, given the risks linked to the privatisation of public universities for the autonomy of the scholars;

Amendment 125 #

Bettina VOLLATH, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pietro BARTOLO, Evin INCIR, Łukasz KOHUT, Giuliano PISAPIA, Klára DOBREV

Motion for a resolution
Recital L m (new)

Lm. Whereas non-discrimination is a fundamental right enshrined in Article 21 of the Charter and that the referendum against LGBTQ people held in Hungary on 3 April 2022 has been discriminatory and violated this fundamental right. Recalls in addition that the results were deemed invalid as neither option ('yes' or 'no') gathered 50% of the votes.

Amendment 126 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L n (new)

Ln. Whereas on 21 December 2018 a comprehensive amendment to the 2011 Church Act was promulgated; whereas, according to the government, it opened legal avenues for religious communities to apply, before the Metropolitan Court of Budapest, for the status of religious association, registered church or incorporated church; whereas the supervision of the execution of the ECtHR judgment in Magyar Keresztény Mennonita Egyház and Others v. Hungary remains pending;

Amendment 127 #

Bettina VOLLATH, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pietro BARTOLO, Evin INCIR, Łukasz KOHUT, Birgit SIPPEL, Giuliano PISAPIA, Klára DOBREV

Motion for a resolution
Recital L n (new)

Ln. urges the Hungarian government to end discrimination against Roma, to intensify its activities to integrate Roma and to take appropriate measures to protect Roma population. Racist threats against the Roma population must be unequivocally and decisively countered.

Amendment 128 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU

Motion for a resolution
Recital L o (new)

Lo. Whereas on 2 July 2021,in its opinion on the constitutional amendments adopted by the Hungarian Parliament in December 2020, the Venice Commission recommended that the public-school system must provide an objective and pluralist curriculum, avoiding indoctrination and discrimination on all grounds, respecting parental convictions and their freedom to choose between religious and non-religious classes;

Amendment 129 #

Bettina VOLLATH, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pietro BARTOLO, Evin INCIR, Łukasz KOHUT, Birgit SIPPEL, Giuliano PISAPIA, Klára DOBREV

Motion for a resolution
Recital L o (new)

Lo. notes that the proportion of women in the Hungarian Parliament in 2019 was 12.6 per cent, the lowest in national parliaments in Europe, and that also the new two-thirds majority has only ten women

Amendment 13 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)

Ac. whereas compliance by a Member State with the values contained in Article 2 TEU is a condition for the enjoyment of all the rights deriving from the application of the Treaties to that Member State; whereas any violation of EU fundamental values by a Member State governments inevitably implies an attack on citizens’ personal freedom, political and social rights, as well as their wealth and wellbeing;

Amendment 130 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L p (new)

Lp. Whereas on 18 June 2020 in Case C-78/18 of Commission v Hungary (Transparency of Associations), the CJEU ruled that by adopting the provisions of Law No LXXVI of 2017 on the Transparency of Organisations which receive Support from Abroad, which impose obligations of registration, declaration and publication on certain categories of civil society organisations directly or indirectly receiving support from abroad exceeding a certain threshold and which provide for the possibility of applying penalties to organisations that do not comply with those obligations, Hungary has introduced discriminatory and unjustified restrictions on foreign donations to civil society organisations, in breach of its obligations under Article 63 TFEU and Articles 7, 8and 12 of the Charter; whereas on 18 February 2021, the Commission decided to send a letter of formal notice to the Hungarian authorities, considering they had not taken the necessary measures to comply with the judgment; whereas on20 July 2021, the Commission indicated in the country chapter on Hungary of the 2021 Rule of Law Report that the Hungarian Parliament repealed the law and introduced new rules on legality checks for civil society, and pressure remains on civil society organisations critical towards the government; where as the adoption of the new law was not preceded by any public consultation, and NGOs have not been consulted directly either, in contradiction with the Venice Commission’s indication that the public consultation should involve, as far as possible, all civil society organisations the status, financing or spheres of operation of which will be affected as a result of the entry into force of this legislation (expressed on20 June 2017 in its opinion on the Draft Law on the Transparency of Organisations Receiving Support from Abroad);

Amendment 131 #

Bettina VOLLATH, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pietro BARTOLO, Evin INCIR, Łukasz KOHUT, Birgit SIPPEL, Giuliano PISAPIA, Klára DOBREV

Motion for a resolution
Recital L p (new)

Lp. Whereas on 5th of May 2020 the Hungarian Parliament has refused to ratify the Council of Europe's Istanbul Convention on Violence against Women. Is deeply concerned about the increase of domestic violence against women during the Corona pandemic in Europe.

Amendment 132 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L q (new)

Lq. Whereas on 23 July 2021, the donor states, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, announced no agreement had been reached on the appointment of a Fund Operator to manage the funding for civil society; as a consequence, no programmes will be implemented under the EEA and Norway Grants during the current funding period, while €214.6 million in funding from the EEA and Norway Grants were set aside for Hungary;

Amendment 133 #

Bettina VOLLATH, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pietro BARTOLO, Evin INCIR, Łukasz KOHUT, Giuliano PISAPIA, Klára DOBREV

Motion for a resolution
Recital L q (new)

Lq. Whereas the UNESCO World Heritage Advisory Council, ICOMOS International, has described the planned large-scale project at Lake Neusiedl in Fertörakos, Hungary, in an analysis as a threat to the World Heritage Site.

Amendment 134 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L r (new)

Lr. Whereas on 17 December 2018, in their joint opinion on Section 253 of Act XLI of 20 July 2018 amending certain tax laws and other related laws, and on the immigration tax, the Venice Commission and the OSCE/ODIHR stated that the 25%tax on financial support to an immigration-supporting activity carried out in Hungary or on the financial support to the operations of an organisation with a seat in Hungary that carries out immigration-supporting activity, does not meet the requirement of legality and constitutes an unjustified interference with the rights to freedom of expression and of association of the NGOs affected;

Amendment 135 #

Bettina VOLLATH, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pietro BARTOLO, Evin INCIR, Łukasz KOHUT, Giuliano PISAPIA, Klára DOBREV

Motion for a resolution
Recital L r (new)

Lr. Condemns that, together with a high level of corruption, there has been a massive increase in social inequality, insecurity and poverty, which not only leads to great insecurity among the population but also constitutes a violation of private property rights and undermines basic civil liberties

Amendment 136 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L s (new)

Ls. Whereas on 21 May 2019, in her Report following the visit to Hungary from 4 to 8 February 2019, the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe stressed that the legislative measures have stigmatised and criminalised civil society activities which should be considered fully legitimate in a democratic society, they exercise a continuous chilling effect on NGOs, and some of the legal provisions are exceptionally vague, arbitrary and not implemented in practice;

Amendment 137 #

Bettina VOLLATH, Dietmar KÖSTER, Pietro BARTOLO, Evin INCIR, Łukasz KOHUT, Giuliano PISAPIA, Klára DOBREV

Motion for a resolution
Recital L s (new)

Ls. Condemns the fact that, in the case of homelessness, the social security system focuses primarily on declaring it illegal for homeless people to stay in public areas and on punitive measures, and calls for social inclusion measures.

Amendment 138 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L t (new)

Lt. Whereas on 11 May 2020, in his report on the visit to Hungary in 2019 the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants observed that civil society organizations working on the rights of migrants in Hungary experienced multiple obstacles in carrying out their legitimate and important work; those obstacles resulted from legislative amendments, financial restrictions and other operational and practical measures taken by the relevant authorities; in addition, a number of civil society organizations had been subjected to smear campaigns, in some cases followed by administrative or criminal investigations;

Amendment 139 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L u (new)

Lu. Whereas on 20 July 2021, the Commission indicated in the country chapter on Hungary of the 2021 Rule of Law Report that the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights (CFR) has gained more competences, but its independence has been questioned by stakeholders;

Amendment 14 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital A d (new)

Ad. whereas the principle of sincere cooperation in Article 4(3) TEU places an obligation on the Union and the Member States to assist each other in carrying out obligations which arise from the Treaties in full mutual respect, and on Member States to take any appropriate measure, general or in particular, to ensure the fulfilment of the obligations arising from the Treaties or resulting from the acts of the institutions of the Union;

Amendment 140 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L v (new)

Lv. Whereas on 2 December 2021, the Commission decided to send a reasoned opinion to the Hungarian authorities considering that by imposing an obligation to provide information on a divergence from ‘traditional gender roles', Hungary restricts the freedom of expression of authors and book publishers (Article 11 of the Charter); discriminates on grounds of sexual orientation in an unjustified way (Article 21 of the Charter ),and incorrectly applies the EU rules on unfair commercial practices under Directive 2005/29/EC concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices in the internal market;

Amendment 141 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L w (new)

Lw. Whereas on 2 December 2021, the Commission decided to send a reasoned opinion to the Hungarian authorities with regard to their national rules that seek to prohibit or limit access to content that portrays the so-called ‘divergence from self-identity corresponding to sex at birth, sex change or homosexuality' for individuals under 18 years of age, considering that these national rules run contrary to Directive 2010/13/EU on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services, Directive 2000/31/EC on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market, as well as human dignity, freedom of expression and information, the right to respect of private life as well as the right to non- discrimination as enshrined respectively in Articles 1, 7, 11 and 21 of the Charter; whereas on 22 June 2021, 18 EU Member States joined a statement on the margins of the General Affairs Council, opposing the adoption of the law;

Amendment 142 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L x (new)

Lx. Whereas on 21 May 2019, in her Report following the visit to Hungary from 4 to 8 February 2019, the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe indicated that Hungary is backsliding in gender equality and women’s rights, the political representation of women is strikingly low, and in government policy, women’s issues are closely associated with family affairs and the authorities have ceased implementing a specific strategy on gender equality;

Amendment 143 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L y (new)

Ly. Whereas on 29 April 2020, in his statement, the UN Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity urged Hungary to drop proposed legislation that would deny trans and gender diverse people the right to legal recognition and self-determination;

Amendment 144 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L z (new)

Lz. Whereas on 3 March 2020, in its Concluding observations on the sixth periodic report of Hungary, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child called on the government to act, adopt a strategy, and provide information and support to vulnerable children, including specific measures targeting girls, Roma children, asylum-seeking and migrant children and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex children; whereas the Committee also raised serious concerns about children with disabilities being deprived of their families and living in institutions, insufficient measures by the Hungarian authorities to end institutionalisation and promote access to health, rehabilitation services and other inclusion activities, cases of sexual abuse and maltreatment of children with disabilities in institutional care, lack of information on the situation of Roma children with disabilities, and the continuing stigma endured by children with disabilities;

Amendment 145 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L aa (new)

Laa. whereas on 5 May 2020 the Parliament of Hungary adopted a resolution rejecting ratification of the Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (Istanbul Convention);

Amendment 146 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L ab (new)

Lab. Whereas on 16 July 2020, in its judgment in Ranav. Hungary, the ECtHR found a violation of the right to respect for private life in case of a transgender man from Iran who had obtained asylum in Hungary but could not legally change his gender and name in that country; whereas the enhanced supervision of the execution remains pending;

Amendment 147 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L ac (new)

Lac. Whereas on 14 June 2021 in her statement the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe urged Hungary’s Parliamentarians to reject draft amendments banning discussion about sexual and gender identity and diversity; whereas on 13 December 2021, in its opinion on the compatibility with international human rights standards of Act LXXIX of 2021 amending certain acts for the protection of children, the Venice Commission concluded that the amendments can hardly be seen as compatible with the ECHR and international human rights standards and urged the Hungarian authorities to repeal a number of provisions;

Amendment 148 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L ad (new)

Lad. Whereas on 14-25 March 2022, in its Report and Recommendations of the Virtual Session, the Sub-Committee on Accreditation of the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions recommended to downgrade the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights to a B-status, as the Sub-Committee has not received the written evidence necessary to establish that the Commissioner is effectively carrying out its mandate in relation to vulnerable groups such as ethnic minorities, LGBTQI people, human rights defenders, refugees and migrants, or related to important human rights issues such as media pluralism, civic space and judicial independence; whereas the Sub-Committee is of the view that the Commissioner is acting in a way that seriously compromises its compliance with the Paris Principles; whereas the Sub-Committee also noted issues in the selection and appointment process and in working relationships and cooperation with civil society organizations and human rights defenders;

Amendment 149 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L ae (new)

Lae. Whereas on 2 July 2021, in its opinion on the constitutional amendments adopted by the Hungarian Parliament in December 2020, the Venice Commission recommended that the constitutional amendment regarding marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and the addition that “The mother shall be a woman, the father shall be a man”, should not be used as an opportunity to withdraw existing laws on the protection of individuals who are not heterosexuals, or to amend these laws to their disadvantage; whereas it also recommended that the interpretation and application of the constitutional amendments, especially in the drafting of the implementing legislation, should be carried out in a way that the principle of non-discrimination on all grounds, including on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity, is thoroughly implemented; whereas it further noted that the amendment “Hungary shall protect the right of children to a self-identity corresponding to their sex at birth” should be repealed or modified to ensure that it does not have the effect of denying the rights of transgender people to legal recognition of their acquired gender identity;

Amendment 15 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Ae. whereas Article 19 TEU gives concrete expression to the value of the rule of law affirmed in Article 2 TEU, entrusts the responsibility for ensuring the full application of EU law in all Member States and judicial protection of the rights of individuals under that law to national courts and tribunals and to the Court of Justice 3a; _________________ 3a Judgments of 27 February 2018, Associação Sindical dos Juízes Portugueses, C-64/16, EU:C:2018:117, paragraph 32

Amendment 150 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L af (new)

Laf. Whereas on 18 October 2021, in its opinion on the amendments to the Act on Equal Treatment and Promotion of Equal Opportunities and to the Act on the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights as adopted by the Hungarian Parliament in December 2020, the Venice Commission indicated that there are risks associated with the merger of the equality bodies with the national human rights institutions including, but not limited to, different traditions, legal procedures and approaches the institutions may have in place and observed that collision of the competences already enjoyed by the Commissioner under Act CXI and those acquired in his /her capacity as successor of the Equal Treatment Authority, is a clear demonstration of a risk that may undermine the effectiveness of the work in the field of promoting equality and combating discrimination;

Amendment 151 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L ag (new)

Lag. Whereas on 13 January 2022 in her statement the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe indicated that the decision of the Hungarian government to conduct a national referendum regarding children’s access to information concerning sexual orientation and gender identity issues on the same day as the parliamentary elections is deeply regrettable as it furthers the instrumentalisation of the human rights of LGBTI people; whereas on 4 April 2022, in the Statement of Preliminary Findings and Conclusions following the Parliamentary Elections and Referendum, the OSCE international election observation mission highlighted that contrary to established international good practice, the legal framework for the referendum does not guarantee equal opportunities to campaign and voters were not informed in an objective and balanced manner on the choices presented to them nor on their binding effect;

Amendment 152 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L ah (new)

Lah. Whereas on 4 April 2022, in the Statement of Preliminary Findings and Conclusions following the Parliamentary Elections and Referendum, the OSCE international election observation mission highlighted that women were underrepresented in the campaign and as candidates;

Amendment 153 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L ai (new)

Lai. Whereas on 25 March 2022, in the Concluding observations on the combined second and third report of Hungary the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities expressed concerns that people with disabilities do not have a mechanism to make a decision out of autonomy, and recommended that Hungary amend its legislation to ensure supported decision-making respect the dignity, autonomy, will and preferences of people with disabilities in exercising their legal capacity; whereas the Committee also recommended that Hungary redesign its measures and redirect its budgets into community-based support services, such as personal assistance, with a view to provide support to live independently and equally in the community;

Amendment 154 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L aj (new)

Laj. Whereas on 9 June 2021 the Commission decided to send a letter of formal notice to Hungary as its national legislation does not fully comply with EU rules prohibiting discrimination under Directive 2000/43/EC implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin and Directive 2000/78/EC establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation which require that Member States laydown effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions for discrimination; whereas the change occurred in July 2020 when Hungary amended the national sanction regime, obliging courts to award moral compensation for discrimination in the field of education and vocational training only in the form of training or education services and not in form of a one-time payment;

Amendment 155 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L ak (new)

Lak. Whereas on 2 December 2021, the Commission sent a letter of formal notice regarding transposition of Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law, as the Hungarian legal framework fails to criminalise the public condoning, denial or gross trivialisation of international crimes and does not ensure that a racist and xenophobic motivation is considered an aggravating circumstance or that such motivation is taken into account by national courts for any crime committed;

Amendment 156 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L al (new)

Lal. Whereas on 6 June 2019, in the Concluding observations on the combined eighteenth to twenty-fifth periodic reports of Hungary the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination indicated it was is deeply alarmed by the prevalence of racist hate speech against Roma, migrants, refugees, asylum seekers and other minorities, which fuels hatred and intolerance and at times incites violence towards such groups, in particular from leading politicians and in the media, including on the Internet; it was especially deeply alarmed at reports that public figures, including at the highest levels, have made statements that may promote racial hatred, in particular as part of the government’s anti- immigrant and anti-refugee campaign started in 2015, and at the presence and operation of organizations that promote racial hatred; whereas, while taking note of the information provided on measures taken to improve the situation of Roma, including in the fields of health and education, as well as through the National Social Inclusion Strategy of 2011, the Committee remained highly concerned at the persistence of discrimination against Roma and the segregation and extreme poverty that they face;

Amendment 157 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L am (new)

Lam. Whereas on 26 May 2020, in its Fifth opinion on Hungary, the Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities indicated that Hungary has maintained its policy to support national minorities based on a solid legislative framework, but it remains necessary to address structural difficulties faced by Roma in all spheres of public and private life, including education, employment, housing and access to health care; whereas it highlighted that urgent measures need to be taken in order to remedy the Roma situation, combat early school leaving, and promote inclusive and quality education, including in segregated areas; in disadvantaged regions, there is a need for stronger complementarity between national and local policies so as to provide long-term solutions to employment and housing problems; access to health care and social services remains subject to serious practical obstacles, mainly to the detriment of Roma women and children;

Amendment 158 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L an (new)

Lan. Whereas on 16 September 2021, in its decision concerning the pending enhanced supervision of the execution of the ECtHR judgments in Horváth and Kiss v. Hungary, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe recalled that this case concerns the discriminatory misplacement and overrepresentation of Roma children in special schools for children with mental disabilities, due to their systematic misdiagnosis, and that, under the ECtHR case-law, the State is under a positive obligation to avoid perpetuating discriminative practices, noted with interest the use of an upgraded examination system, including tools allowing an objective assessment of the learning abilities of Roma children, by all 21 expert committees, the steady increase in the number of children receiving integrated education when diagnosed with special educational needs and the social development program, which was put in place in 30 of the most disadvantaged settlements, and encouraged the Hungarian authorities to further pursue these measures, reiterated their invitation to the authorities to provide examples demonstrating the effectiveness of the administrative and judicial remedies against the findings of the expert committees, to complete the statistical data provided in this respect, and to provide further information on the newly established procedure before the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights, and noted that the possible participation of an equal opportunities expert during the examination of the learning abilities of multiply disadvantaged children constitutes an important safeguard in this process with a view to preventing discriminatory practices against Roma children but that it remains purely theoretical so far;

Amendment 159 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L ao (new)

Lao. Whereas the supervision of the execution of the ECtHR judgments in Balázs group v. Hungary concerning violations of the prohibition of discrimination read in conjunction with the prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment on account of the authorities’ failure to carry out effective investigations into the question of possible racial motives behind the ill-treatment inflicted on the Roma applicants by law enforcement agents, remains pending;

Amendment 16 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital A f (new)

Af. Whereas the adoption of the Fourth Amendment of the Fundamental Law repealed the rulings of the Hungarian Constitutional Court (HCC) given prior to the entry into force of the Fundamental Law on 25 April 2011;

Amendment 160 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L ap (new)

Lap. Whereas on 19 March 2020, in Case C-564/18 Bevándorlásiés Menekültügyi Hivatal (Tompa), the CJEU ruled that Directive 2013/32/EU on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection precludes national legislation which allows an application for international protection to be rejected as inadmissible on the ground that the applicant arrived on the territory of the Member State concerned via a State in which that person was not exposed to persecution or a risk of serious harm, or in which a sufficient degree of protection is guaranteed, as well as national legislation which sets a time limit of eight days within which a court hearing an appeal against a decision rejecting an application for international protection as inadmissible is to give a decision, where that court is unable to ensure, within such a time limit, that the substantive rules and procedural guarantees enjoyed by the applicant under EU law are effective;

Amendment 161 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L aq (new)

Laq. Whereas on 2 April 2020, in Joined Cases C-715/17, C-718/17and C- 719/17 including Commission v Hungary (Temporary mechanism for the relocation of applicants for international protection), the CJEU ruled that by failing to indicate at regular intervals, and at least every three months, an appropriate number of applicants for international protection who can be relocated swiftly to its territory, Hungary has, since 25 December 2015, failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5(2) of Decision 2015/1601 and has consequently failed to fulfil its subsequent relocation obligations under Article 5(4) to (11) of that decision;

Amendment 162 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L ar (new)

Lar. Whereas on 14 May 2020, in Joined Cases C-924/19PPU and C-925/19 PPU OrszágosIdegenrendészeti Főigazgatóság Dél-alföldi Regionális Igazgatóság and OrszágosIdegenrendészeti Főigazgatóság, the CJEU ruled that Directive 2008/115 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals and Directive 2013/33/EU mean that the obligation imposed on a third-country national to remain permanently in a transit zone the perimeter of which is restricted and closed, within which that national’s movements are limited and monitored, and which he or she cannot legally leave voluntarily, in any direction whatsoever, appears to be a deprivation of liberty, characterised by ‘detention’ within the meaning of those directives, and indicated that EU law precludes a number of provisions of the Hungarian legislation;

Amendment 163 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L as (new)

Las. Whereas on 17 December 2020, the CJEU in CaseC-808/18 Commission v Hungary (Accueil des demandeurs de protection internationale) ruled that Hungary has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 5, Article 6(1), Article 12(1) and Article 13(1) of Directive 2008/115/EC on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals, under Article 6, Article 24(3), Article 43 and Article 46(5) of Directive 2013/32/EU on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection, and under Articles 8, 9 and 11 of Directive 2013/33/EU laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international protection: 1) in providing that applications for international protection from third- country nationals or stateless persons who, arriving from Serbia, wish to access, in its territory, the international protection procedure, may be made only in the transit zones of Röszke and Tompa, while adopting a consistent and generalised administrative practice drastically limiting the number of applicants authorised to enter those transit zones daily; 2) in establishing a system of systematic detention of applicants for international protection in the transit zones of Röszke and Tompa, without observing the guarantees provided for in Article 24(3) and Article 43 of Directive 2013/32 and Articles 8, 9 and 11 of Directive 2013/33; 3) in allowing the removal of all third- country nationals staying illegally in its territory, with the exception of those of them who are suspected of having committed a criminal offence, without observing the procedures and safeguards laid down in Article 5, Article 6(1), Article 12(1) and Article 13(1) of Directive 2008/115; 4) in making the exercise by applicants for international protection who fall within the scope of Article 46(5) of Directive 2013/32 of their right to remain in its territory subject to conditions contrary to EU law; whereas on 27 January 2021, the European Border and Coast Guard Agency(Frontex) announced suspending its operations in Hungary, following the CJEU ruling; whereas on 12 November 2021, the Commission decided to refer Hungary to the CJEU for failing to comply with the judgment and requesting that the CJEU order the payment of financial penalties;

Amendment 164 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L at (new)

Lat. Whereas on 9 June 2021, the Commission decided to send a letter of formal notice and a reasoned opinion to the Hungarian authorities for failing to fully transpose Directive 2013/32/EU on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection as regards provisions on the personal interview, the medical screening, guarantees for unaccompanied children and teenagers and on the asylum examination procedure;

Amendment 165 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L au (new)

Lau. Whereas on 15 July 2021, the Commission decided to refer Hungary to the CJEU considering that new asylum procedure is incompatible with Article 6 of Directive 2013/32 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection, interpreted in the light of Article 18 of the Charter (Case C- 823/21 Commission v Hungary);

Amendment 166 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L av (new)

Lav. Whereas on 16 November 2021, in Case C-821/19 Commission v Hungary (Incrimination de l’aide aux demandeurs d’asile), the CJEU ruled that Hungary has failed to fulfil its obligations under:1) Article 33(2) of Directive 2013/32/EU on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection by allowing an application for international protection to be rejected as inadmissible on the ground that the applicant arrived on its territory via a State in which that person was not exposed to persecution or a risk of serious harm, or in which a sufficient degree of protection is guaranteed; 2) Article 8(2) and Article 22(1)of Directive 2013/32 and Article 10(4) of Directive 2013/33/EU laying down standards for the reception of applicants for international protection by criminalising in its national law the actions of any person who, in connection with an organising activity, provides assistance in respect of the making or lodging of an application for asylum in its territory, where it can be proved beyond all reasonable doubt that that person was aware that that application could not be accepted under that law; 3) Article 8(2),Article 12(1)(c) and Article 22(1) of Directive 2013/32 and Article 10(4) of Directive 2013/33 by preventing any person who is suspected of having committed such an offence from the right to approach its external borders;

Amendment 167 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L aw (new)

Law. Whereas on 21 May 2019, in her Report following the visit to Hungary from 4 to 8 February 2019, the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe found that the stance against immigration and asylum seekers adopted by the government since 2015 has resulted in a legislative framework which undermines the reception of asylum seekers and the integration of recognised refugees as prescribed by international human rights obligations;

Amendment 168 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L ax (new)

Lax. Whereas on 17 March 2020 in its report on the visit to Hungary in 2018, the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) highlighted that nothing had been done since the CPT’s 2017 ad hoc visit to put in place effective safeguards to prevent ill- treatment of persons returned by Hungarian police officers through the border fence towards Serbia, and it was also clear that there were still no legal remedies capable of offering such persons effective protection against their forced removal and/or refoulement, including chain refoulement;

Amendment 169 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L ay (new)

Lay. Whereas on 6 June 2019, in the Concluding observations on the combined eighteenth to twenty-fifth periodic reports of Hungary the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination expressed concerns by the alarming situation of asylum seekers, refugees and migrants, at the reports that the principle of non-refoulement is not fully respected in law and in practice, and deep alarm at the reported excessive use of force and violence by law enforcement officers against third country nationals found anywhere in Hungary, while “pushing back” those found near the border to Serbia, resulting in injuries and bodily harm;

Amendment 17 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital A g (new)

Ag. Whereas the HCC increasingly relies on the vague concept of constitutional identity based on the historic constitution in its decisions; whereas the HCC does not deem that constitutional identity as list of closed and static values and will determine it on a case-by-case basis; whereas in the case- law of the HCC values the constitutional identity above the Fundamental Law; whereas the HCC may review the joint exercise of power within the European Union; whereas the Hungarian Government uses the HCC as a means of evading the enforcement of a binding CJEU judgment;

Amendment 170 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L az (new)

Laz. Whereas on 2 March 2021, in its judgment in R.R. and Others v. Hungary, the ECtHR found that the lack of food provided to R.R. and the conditions of stay of the other applicants (a pregnant woman and children) had led to violation of the prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment, and the applicants’ stay in the transit zone had amounted to a defacto deprivation of liberty and that the absence of any formal decision of the authorities and any proceedings by which the lawfulness of their detention could have been decided speedily by a court had led to violations of right to liberty and security; whereas on 24 February 2022, in its judgment in M.B.K. and Others v. Hungary, the ECtHR came to similar conclusions; whereas the enhanced supervision of the execution of those judgments remains pending;

Amendment 171 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L az (new)

Laz. Whereas on 11 May 2020, in his report on the visit to Hungary in 2019 the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants reiterated his call to conduct a meaningful reassessment of the current situation and its migration policies and indicated that Hungary should terminate the so-called crisis situation, which does not correspond to reality and has a severe negative impact on the human rights of migrants, asylum seekers, the freedom of civil society organizations and the power of the judiciary, as well as lift all other restrictive measures with similar features and consequences;

Amendment 172 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L bb (new)

Lbb. Whereas on 8 July 2021, in its judgment in Shahzad v. Hungary, the ECtHR found that the applicant had been subject to a “collective” expulsion as his individual situation had not been ascertained by the authorities, and they had not provided genuine and effective ways to enter Hungary, removal had not been a result of his conduct, and the applicant had not had an adequate legal remedy available to him; whereas the enhanced supervision of the execution of that judgment remains pending;

Amendment 173 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU

Motion for a resolution
Recital L bc (new)

Lbc. Whereas on 2 December 2021, in its decision concerning the pending enhanced supervision of the execution of the ECtHR judgment in Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe recalled that this case concerns a violation of the procedural obligation under Article 3 to assess the risks of ill-treatment before removing the asylum-seeking applicants to Serbia by relying on a general presumption of “safe third country”, noted with deep regret that no steps have been taken towards conducting the necessary reassessment of the legislative presumption of “safe third country” in respect of Serbia and firmly reiterated their invitation to carry out such reassessment without further delay and in line with the requirements of the ECtHR case-law, and to present the grounds and the outcome thereof, and noted with grave concern that, despite the concerns expressed in their previous decision, the practice of forced removals without orderly procedure has continued; strongly reiterated their call on the authorities to fully comply with the requirements flowing from the ECtHR judgment and to ensure that forced returns are framed by orderly procedures and safeguards notably concerning every person’s right to seek asylum as established by international law;

Amendment 174 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L bd (new)

Lbd. Whereas the supervision of the execution of the ECtHR judgments in Nabil and Others group v. Hungary concerning violations of the applicant asylum seekers’ right to liberty and security, on account of their detention pending the examination of the merits of their asylum claims, remains pending;

Amendment 175 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L be (new)

Lbe. Whereas on 20 July 2020, the Council recommended in its opinion on the 2020 Convergence Programme of Hungary to address shortages of health workers and ensure an adequate supply of critical medical products and infrastructure to increase the resilience of the health system, improve access to quality preventive and primary care services, to protect employment through enhanced short-time working arrangements and effective active labour- market policies and extend the duration of unemployment benefits, to improve the adequacy of social assistance and ensure access to essential services and quality education for all;

Amendment 176 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L bf (new)

Lbf. Whereas on 18 June 2021, the Council recommended in its opinion on the 2021 Convergence Programme of Hungary to give priority to fiscal structural reforms that will help provide financing for public policy priorities and contribute to the long-term sustainability of public finances, including, where relevant, by strengthening the coverage, adequacy and sustainability of health and social protection systems for all;

Amendment 177 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L bg (new)

Lbg. Whereas on 3 March 2020, in the Concluding observations on the sixth periodic report of Hungary, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child recommended that Hungary continue to invest in measures to end poverty, paying particular attention to Roma children and children living in socioeconomically deprived areas and raised serious concerns about the number of students leaving school early, most of them from disadvantaged backgrounds, the allocation of public schools to religious communities, which can contribute to segregation based on religion and belief, the continued segregation of Roma children in education, the education gap between Roma and non-Roma children, the lack of official data on Roma children in education, the bullying, abuse and exclusion faced by children in schools, in particular, LGBTI children, the use of methods of discipline in schools not protecting children from physical and mental violence;

Amendment 178 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Recalls, first and foremost, that Hungary, just like every Member State, has its own national identity and constitutional traditions that are in line with European values and must always be treated with respect, objectivity and consideration for the principle of equality; underlines that the rule of law is a fundamental value for all Member States; expresses concern that the abuse of the concept of the rule of law for political aims destroys mutual trust and sincere cooperation between Member States;

Amendment 179 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)

-1. Whereas democratic elections organised on level playing field are utmost important in the democratic nature of our societies;

Amendment 18 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A h (new)

Ah. Whereas the Fundamental Law was amended nine times since its adoption; whereas the Hungarian Government recently proposed the tenth amendment thereof; whereas cardinal laws cover 35 subject matters 5a, including issues which should be left to the ordinary political process and which are usually decided by simple majority, that now amounts to more than 300 pieces of legislation that were adopted since 25 April 2011; _________________ 5a Az Alaptörvény elfogadását követően benyújtott, illetve elfogadott sarkalatos törvények, https://www.parlament.hu/documents/101 81/1205420/Az+Alapt%C3%B6rv%C3%A 9ny+elfogad%C3%A1s%C3%A1t+k%C3 %B6vet%C5%91en+beny%C3%BAjtott% 2C+illetve+elfogadott+sarkalatos+t%C3% B6rv%C3%A9nyek/0af78bee-9b54-49fd- 97df-2c9ba024c265

Amendment 180 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Reiterates that the concerns of Parliament relate to the following issues in Hungary: - the functioning of the constitutional and electoral system; - the independence of the judiciary and of other institutions and the rights of judges; - corruption and conflicts of interest; - privacy and data protection; - freedom of expression; - academic freedom; - freedom of religion; - freedom of association; - the right to equal treatment; - the rights of persons belonging to minorities, including Roma and Jews, and protection against hateful statements against such minorities; - the fundamental rights of migrants, asylum seekers and refugees; - economic and social rights;deleted

Amendment 181 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. Reiterates that the concerns of Parliament related to ~~the following issues in Hungary:~~Hungary have been clarified by the Hungarian Government on numerous occasions; regrets the fact that the Parliament intends to excerpt pressure on Member States for ideological reasons and as regards the handling of specific cases; underlines that political and ideological debates should not be disguised as legal debates;

Amendment 182 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. Reiterates that the concerns of Parliament ~~relate to the~~were identified in the reasoned proposal initiating the Article 7 TEU procedure and were subsequently foull~~owing issues in Hungary:~~y explained by Hungary in subsequent hearings under that procedure;

Amendment 183 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. Reiterates, as a general remark, that the concerns of Parliament ~~relate to the following issues in Hungary~~with regard to the rule of law relate in particular to:

Amendment 184 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 1

~~- the functioning of the constitutional and electoral system;~~deleted

Amendment 185 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 1

~~- the functioning of the constitutional and electoral system;~~deleted

Amendment 186 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 2

~~- the independence of the judiciary and of other institutions and the rights of judges;~~deleted

Amendment 187 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 2

~~- the independence of the judiciary and of other institutions and the rights of judges;~~deleted

Amendment 188 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 3

~~- corruption and conflicts of interest;~~deleted

Amendment 189 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 3

~~- corruption and conflicts of interest;~~deleted

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas any clear risk of a serious breach by a Member State or by the EU institutions of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU does not concern solely the individual Member State or institution where the risk materialises but has an impact on the other Member States and the entire EU, on mutual trust between them and between them and the EU, on the very nature of the ~~Union~~latter and its Member States’ and citizens’ fundamental rights ~~under Union law~~;

Amendment 190 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 4

~~- privacy and data protection;~~deleted

Amendment 191 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 4

~~- privacy and data protection;~~deleted

Amendment 192 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 5

~~- freedom of expression;~~deleted

Amendment 193 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 5

~~- freedom of expression;~~deleted

Amendment 194 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 5 a (new)

- media pluralism,

Amendment 195 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 6

~~- academic freedom;~~deleted

Amendment 196 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 6

~~- academic freedom;~~deleted

Amendment 197 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 7

~~- freedom of religion;~~deleted

Amendment 198 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 7

~~- freedom of religion;~~deleted

Amendment 199 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 8

~~- freedom of association;~~deleted

Amendment 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1

— having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU), and in particular Articles 2, 5(3) and 7(1) thereof,

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas Article 5(3) of the Treaty on the European Union states that ‘under the principle of subsidiarity, in areas which do not fall within its exclusive competence, the Union shall act only if and in so far as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States’;

Amendment 200 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 8

~~- freedom of association;~~deleted

Amendment 201 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 9

~~- the right to equal treatment;~~deleted

Amendment 202 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 9

~~- the right to equal treatment;~~deleted

Amendment 203 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 10

~~- the rights of persons belonging to minorities, including Roma and Jews, and protection against hateful statements against such minorities;~~deleted

Amendment 204 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 10

~~- the rights of persons belonging to minorities, including Roma and Jews, and protection against hateful statements against such minorities;~~deleted

Amendment 205 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 10 a (new)

- LGBTQI rights,

Amendment 206 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 11

~~- the fundamental rights of migrants, asylum seekers and refugees;~~deleted

Amendment 207 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 11

~~- the fundamental rights of migrants, asylum seekers and refugees;~~deleted

Amendment 208 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 12

~~- economic and social rights;~~deleted

Amendment 209 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 – indent 12

~~- economic and social rights;~~deleted

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas ~~the scope of~~ Article 7 TEU is not confined to the obligations under the Treaties, as in Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and whereas the Union can assess the existence of a clear risk of a serious breach of the common values in areas falling under Member States’ competencesclearly sets out the infringement procedure against a Member State where there is a clear risk of the EU values set out in Article 2 TEU being violated;

Amendment 210 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

Amendment 211 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

Amendment 212 #

Ramona STRUGARIU, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Moritz KÖRNER, Malik AZMANI, Abir AL-SAHLANI, Olivier CHASTEL, Anna Júlia DONÁTH, Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Believes that, taken together, the facts and trends mentioned in Parliament’s resolutions represent a systemic threat to the values of Article 2 TEU and constitute a clear risk of a serious breach thereof; expresses regret that the lack of decisive EU action has contributed to turning Hungary into hybrid regime of electoral autocracy, according to the relevant indicesshow that the European mainstream is working to create a federal, supra-national EU which suppresses the independence and sovereignty of Member States and enforces a single ideology on them; whereas this results in the arbitrary use of the values enshrined in Article 2 TEU and politically motivated sanction mechanisms against Member States which disagree with this direction; underlines that this represents a systemic threat to European cooperation; expresses regret that Hungary is the target of unfounded and politically motivated attacks only because it firmly stands up for the sovereignty and independence of Member States and the original idea behind European cooperation;

Amendment 213 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Believes that, taken together, the facts and trends mentioned in Parliament’s resolutions represent a systemic threat to the values of Article 2 TEU and constitute a clear risk of a serious breach thereof; strongly condemns the systematic threats to the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights that have been brought about by the Hungarian government to the detriment of its own people and expresses deep regret that the lack of decisive EU action has contributed to turning Hungary into a hybrid regime of electoral autocracy, according to the relevant indices;

Amendment 214 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. ~~Believes that, taken together, the facts and trends mentioned in Parliament’s resolutions represent a systemic threat to the values of Article 2 TEU and constitute a clear risk of a ser~~Commits, in these areas and within the limits of the powers conferred on it by the Treaties, to apply the same criteria used in its previous bre~~ach thereof; expresses regret that the lack of decisive EU action has contributed to turning Hungary into hybrid regime of electoral autocracy, according to the relevant indices~~levant resolutions to all Member States and to the EU institutions with the same stringency;

Amendment 215 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Strongly regrets the inability of the Council to make meaningful progress in the ongoing Article 7(1) TEU procedure; urges the Council to ensure that hearings take place at a minimum once per Presidency during ongoing Article 7 TEU procedures and also address new developments affecting the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights; calls on the Council to publish comprehensive minutes after each hearing; emphasises that there is no need for unanimity in the Council either to identify a clear risk of a serious breach of Union values under Article 7(1), or to address concrete recommendations to the Member States in question and provide deadlines for the implementation of those recommendations; reiterates its call for the Council to do so, underlining that any further delay to such action would amount to a breach of the rule of law principle by the Council itself; calls on the Council to issue recommendations to Hungary as soon as possible in order to remedy the issues mentioned in its resolution of 12 September 2018 and in the present resolution, asking it to implement all the judgments and recommendations mentioned; insists that Parliament’s role and competences be duly respectedNotes that, according to the Treaties, the Council is the competent institution to conduct Article 7 procedures and, in the spirit of mutual trust, shall defer to its decision at the end of its examination;

Amendment 216 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Strongly regrets the inability of the Council to~~Notes the Council's indecision as regards makeing meaningful progress in the ongoing Article 7(1) TEU procedure; urges the Council to ensure that hearings take place at a minimum once per Presidency during ongoing Article 7 TEU procedures and also address new developments affecting the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights; calls on the Council to publish comprehensive minutes after each hearing; emphasises that there is no need for unanimity in the Council either to identify a clear risk of a serious breach of Union values under Article 7(1), or to address concrete recommendations to the Member States in question and provide deadlines for the implementation of those recommendations; reiterates its call for the Council to do so, underlining that any further delay to such action would amount to a breach of the rule of law principle by the Council itself; calls on the Council to issue recommendations to Hungary as soon as possible in order to remedy the issues mentioned in its resolution of 12 September 2018 and in the present resolution, asking it to implement all the judgments and recommendations mentioned; insists that Parliament’s role and competences be duly respectednot to organise any more hearings, but to conclude this procedure as a matter of urgency;

Amendment 217 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Strongly regret~~Notes the inability of the Council to make meaningful progress in the ongoing Article 7(1) TEU procedure; urges the Council to ensure that hearings take place at a minimum once per Presidency during ongoing Article 7 TEU procedures and also address new developments affecting the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights; calls on the Council to publish comprehensive minutes after each hearing; emphasises that there is no need for unanimity in the Council either to identify a clear risk of a serious breach of Union values under Article 7(1), or to address concrete recommendations to the Member States in question and provide deadlines for the implementation of those recommendations; reiterates its call for the Council to do so, underlining that any further delay to such action would amount to a breach of the rule of law principle by the Council itself; calls on the Council to issue recommendations to Hungary as soon as possible in order to remedy the issues mentioned in its resolution of 12 September 2018 and in the present resolution, asking it to implement all the judgments and recommendations mentioned; insists that Parliament’s role and competences be duly respectedd the procedure immediately as it is nothing more but a political procedure which does not lead anywhere, but harms European cooperation;

Amendment 218 #

Ramona STRUGARIU, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Moritz KÖRNER, Malik AZMANI, Abir AL-SAHLANI, Olivier CHASTEL, Anna Júlia DONÁTH, Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Str~~ongly regret~~esses the iuna~~bil~~nimity of the ~~Council to make meaningful progress in the ongoing Article 7(1) TEU procedure; urges the Council to ensure that hearings take place at a minimum once per Presidency during~~vote within the Council in the ongoing Article 7(1) TEU procedures and also address new developments affecting the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights; calls on the Council to publish comprehensive minutes after each hearing; emphasises that there is no need for unanimity in the Council either to identify a clear risk of a serious breach of Union values under Article 7(1), or to address concrete recommendations to the Member States in question and provide deadlines for the implementation of those recommendations; reiterates its call for the Council to do so, underlining that any further delay to such action would amount to a breach of the rule of law principle by the Council itself; calls on the Council to issue recommendations to Hungary as soon as possible in order to remedy the issues mentioned in its resolution of 12 September 2018 and in the present resolution, asking it to implement all the judgments and recommendations mentioned; insists that Parliament’s role and competences; insists that the role and competences of Hungarian government officials, who were elected in democratic elections, be duly respected;

Amendment 219 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Strongly reg~~Deplorets the inability of the Council to make meaningful progress in the ongoing Article 7(1) TEU procedure; urges the Council to ensure that hearings take place at a minimum once per Presidency during ongoing Article 7 TEU procedures and also address new developments affecting the rule of law, democracy and fundamental rights; calls on the Council to publish comprehensive minutes after each hearing; emphasises that there is no need for unanimity in the Council either to identify a clear risk of a serious breach of Union values under Article 7(1), or to address concrete recommendations to the Member States in question and provide deadlines for the implementation of those recommendations; reiterates its call for the Council to do so, underlining that any further delay to such action would amount to a breach of the rule of law principle by the Council itself; stresses that Member States have the obligation to act together and put an end to attacks on core EU values; calls on the Council to issue recommendations to Hungary as soon as possible in order to remedy the issues mentioned in its resolution of 12 September 2018 and in the present resolution, asking it to implement all the judgments and recommendations mentioned; insists that Parliament’s role and competences be duly respected;

Amendment 22 #

Ramona STRUGARIU, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Moritz KÖRNER, Malik AZMANI, Abir AL-SAHLANI, Olivier CHASTEL, Anna Júlia DONÁTH, Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the scope of Article 7 TEU is ~~not~~ confined to the obligations under the Treaties~~, as in Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,~~ and whereas the Union can assess the existence of a clear risk of a serious breach of the common values in areas falling under ~~Member States’~~the EU's competences;

Amendment 220 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Calls on the Council and the Commission to devote more attention to systemic changes that have been brought about by the government in its systematic dismantling of Rule of Law, as well as to the interplay between the various breaches of EU values identified in its resolutions; underlines that leaving Rule of Law breaches unchecked undermines democratic institutions and eventually affects the human rights and lives of everyone in the country,

Amendment 221 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Suggests that addressing and ignoring the recommendations by the OSCE/ODIHR election reports is discussed and as a result concrete actions are taken including under the Article 7(1) TEU procedure;

Amendment 222 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. ~~Calls on~~Urges the Commission to make full use of the tools available to address the clear risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the values on which the Union is founded, in particular expedited infringement procedures, applications for interim measures before the Court of Justice and actions regarding non- implementation of the Court’s judgments; recalls the importance ofcomply with EU law and not to use tools other than Article 7 TEU to protect the rule of law; recalls that, according to CJEU case- law, the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation ~~and welcomes the decision to trigger it~~ is aimed solely at protecting the case of Hungary, albeit after a long delay and with a limited scope; calls on the Commission to take immediate action under the regulation as regards other breaches of the rule of law; notes the risk of misuse of fundsEU budget; calls on the Commission to accept Hungary's plan under the Recovery and Resilience Facility ~~and reiterates~~ in accordance witsh c~~all for the Commission to refrain from approval of the Hungarian p~~urrent lanw;

Amendment 223 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission to make full use of the tools available to address the clear risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the values on which the Union is founded, in particular expedited infringement procedures, applications for interim measures before the Court of Justice and actions regarding non- implementation of the Court’s judgments; recalls the importance ofnot to portray political demands that fall outside the competence of the Union as general requirements for the Rrule of Law Conditionality Regulation and welcomes the decision to trigger it in the case of Hungary, albeit after a long delay and with a limited scope; calls on the Commission to take immediate action under the regulation as regards other breaches of the rule of law; notes the risk of misuse of funds under the Recovery and Resilience Facility and reiterates its call for the Commission to refrain from approval of the Hungarian planlaw and not to use and mix sanction mechanisms against Hungary contrary to the provisions of the Treaties to pursue political goals;

Amendment 224 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission to make full use of the tools available to address the clear risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the values on which the Union is founded, in particular expedited infringement procedures, applications for interim measures before the Court of Justice and actions regarding non- implementation of the Court’s judgments; recalls the importance of the Rule of Law C, pending that decision, to refrain from using the rule of law conditionality regulation or any other tool to exert pressure on Hungary in the handling of specific cases in areas of national competence; notes with regret that this conditionality Rreg~~ulation and welcomes the decision to trigger it in the case of Hungary, albeit after a long delay and with a limited scope; calls~~ime would otherwise become another political sanctioning mechanism on top onf the Commission to take immediate action under the regulation as regards other breaches of the rule of law; notes the risk of misuse of funds under the Recovery and Resilience Facility and reiterates its call for the Commission to refrain from approval of the Hungarian planprocedures set out in Article 7, aimed primarily at providing means to circumvent the procedural requirements of unanimity embedded in the latter;

Amendment 225 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission to make full use of the tools available to address the clear risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the values on which the Union is founded, in particular expedited infringement procedures, applications for interim measures before the Court of Justice and actions regarding non- implementation of the Court’s judgments; recalls the importance of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation and welcomes the decision to trigger it in the case of Hungary, albeit after a long delay and with a limited scope; calls on the Commission to take immediate action under the regulation as regards other breaches of the rule of law; notes the risk of misuse of funds under the Recovery and Resilience Facility and reiterates its call for the Commission to refrain from approval of the Hungarian plan until Hungary has fully complied with all European Semester country- specific recommendations in the field of the rule of law and until it has implemented all the relevant judgments of the CJEU and the ECtHR;

Amendment 226 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission ~~to make full use of~~not to abuse the tools available to address the ~~clear~~alleged risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the values on which the Union is founded, in particular expedited infringement procedures, applications for interim measures before the Court of Justice and actions regarding non- implementation of the Court’s judgments; recalls the importance of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation and welcomes the decision to trigger it in the case of Hungary, albeit after a long delay and with a limited scope; calls on the Commission to takeon the Commission to reject immediate action under the regulation as regards other alleged breaches of the rule of law; notes the risk of misuse of funds under the Recovery and Resilience Facility and reiterates its call for the Commission to refrain from ~~approval of~~exerting political pressure on Hungary by not approving the Hungarian plan;

Amendment 227 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

Amendment 228 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Believes that, taken together, the facts and trends show that the European mainstream is pushing for the creation of a supranational Europe that strips Member States of their independence and sovereignty and imposes a single ideology on them; this results in the values enshrined in Article 2 of the TEU being applied arbitrarily and politically motivated sanction mechanisms against Member States that do not agree with that course of action; stresses that this poses a systemic threat to European cooperation; expresses regret that Hungary has suffered ungrounded and politically motivated attacks for no other reason than the fact that it strongly defends sovereignty and the independence of Member States and the initial idea of European cooperation;

Amendment 229 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Calls on the Commission to support independent civil society in Hungary which safeguards the European values enshrined in Article 2 TEU, in particular, by using the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values programme; reiterates its call on the Commission to adopt a comprehensive civil society strategy for the protection and development of civic space within the Union that integrates all existing tools and outlines a set of concrete measures that will protect and strengthen civic space;

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the scope of Article 7 TEU is not confined to the obligations under the Treaties, as in Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and whereas the ~~Union~~Council can assess the existence of a clear risk of a serious breach of the common values in areas falling under Member States’ competences;

Amendment 230 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, and the governments and parliaments of the Member States~~, the Council of Europe, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe and the United Nations~~.

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

Amendment 25 #

D. whereas for several years the sEuropean instituation in Hungary has not been addressed and many concerns remain, and in the meantime many new issues have arisen, which is having a negative impact on the image of the Union, as well as its effectiveness and credibility in the defence of fundamental rights, human rights and democracy globally, and revealing the need to address them through concerted Union acs have been using the debates on the respect for the rule of law and fundamental rights as a pretext to put political pressure on certain Member States to change their policies which belong to their national competences; whereas Hungary has been attacked for more than 10 years because the European left cannot bear the power of a national government in Hungary that is firmly committed to classical European values and traditions and opposes the European liberal mainstream which tries to deny and eliminate these values and traditions;

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas for several years the internal situation in Hungary has ~~not been addressed and many concerns remain, and in the meantime many new issues have arise~~remained a subject of interest for both Parliament and the Commission, which is having a negative impact on the ~~image~~cohesion of the Union, a~~s well as~~nd its effectiveness ~~and credibility in the defence of fundamental rights, human rights and democracy globally, and revealing the need to address them through concerted Union action~~globally;

Amendment 27 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas for several years the situation in Hungary has not been addressed and many concerns remain, and in the meantime many new issues have arisen, which is having a negative impact on the image of the Union, as well as its effectiveness and credibility in the defence of fundamental rights, human rights and democracy globally, and revealing the need to addrdespite the many visits, hearings, statements and resolutions of the last few years, the assessment of the situation in Hungary, critical as it may be, has not provided good reason to continue this procedure; and whereas the European institutions have, however, often used the debates on respect for the rule of law and fundamental rights as a pretext to put political pressure on a number of Member Statess t~~hem through concerted Union action~~o change policies that fall within national competences;

Amendment 28 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

D a. Whereas, since the adoption on 20 June 2018 by the Hungarian Parliament of the Seventh amendment to the Fundamental law which forbids habitual residence in a public space, several ordinary courts requested the Constitutional Court to annul the legislation alleging the unconstitutionality of the law on many grounds, including Decision no. 38/2012. (XI. 14.) in which the Court had found an almost identical provision contrary to the Fundamental Law; whereas the Constitutional Court rejected after an unreasonable delay all the petitions submitted by the ordinary courts on every single ground and did not take into account any submissions that was not supporting the government's reasoning;

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas following the ad hoc delegation of its Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs to Budapest, Hungary, from 29 September to 1 October 2021, the majority of the members of the delegation, who had prejudices and were political biased on arrival in Hungary, still have serious concerns about democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in the country; whereas ~~the delegation~~, based on nothing other than vague and unsubstantiated ‘concerns’ and ‘worries’ primarily rooted in their own political assessment, that same majority has concluded that the situation has not improved since 2018, but has instead deteriorated;

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 3 a (new)

— having regard to the Rule of Law Checklist, adopted by the Venice Commission at its 106th plenary session (Venice, 11-12 March 2016),

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas following the ad hoc delegation of its Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs to Budapest, Hungary, from 29 September to 1 October 2021, the majority of the members of the delegation ~~still have serious concerns about democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in the country; whereas the delegation has concluded that the situ~~arrived in Hungary with prejudices and political bias without seeking a real understanding of the events in the country; whereas the only aim of the visit for the majority of the members of the delegation hwas ~~not improved since 2018, but has instead deteriorated~~to have their already established views echoed by certain ideologically biased NGOs;

Amendment 31 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas following the ad hoc delegation of its Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs to Budapest, Hungary, from 29 September to 1 October 2021, the majority of the members of the delegation still have serious concerns about democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in the country; whereas the delegation has concluded that the situation has not improved since 2018, but hasit was evident that its preparation was biased with preconceived notions and that it did not take into account the required balance of inste~~ad deteriorated~~rviewees;

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas on 20 July 2021, for example, the Commission indicated in the country chapter on Hungary of the 2021 Rule of Law Report that the transparency and quality of the legislative process remain a source of ‘concern’, ~~although~~despite the fact that an amendment to the constitution will limit the powers of government as regards the ‘state of danger’ regime after July 2023; whereas ‘concerns’ have been expressed about newly established private trusts receiving significant public funding, managed by board members said to be close to the current government; whereas such accusations do not reflect an objective view of the situation and raise serious concerns about the report’s concept, methodology and sources, as it seems to apply ‘double standards’ when dealing with Hungary in comparison to other Member States;

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas ~~on 20 July 2021, the Commission indicated in the country chapter on Hungary of the 2021 Rule of Law Report that the transparency and quality of the legislative process remain a source of~~the Commission's Rule of Law Reports raise serious concern,s although an amendment to the constitution will limit the powers of government as regards the ‘state of danger’ regime after July 2023; whereas concerns have been expressed about newly established private trusts receiving significant public funding, managed by board members close to the current government;s regards the methodology used and the choice of sources and show markedly unequal treatment of certain Member States

Amendment 34 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas ~~on 20 July 2021, the Commission indicated in the country chapter on Hungary of the 2021 Rule of Law Report that the transparency and quality of the legislative process remain a so~~the Commission's Rule of Law Report does not present an objective and substantiated picturce of ~~concern, although an amendment to the const~~the rule of law situation will limit the powers of government as regards the ‘state of danger’ regime after July 2023; whereas concerns have been expressed about newly established private trusts receiving significant public funding, managed by board members close to the current governmentin Member States as it raises serious concerns as regards its concept, methodology, sources and content; whereas the evaluative findings of the Report reflect double standards and discrimination against Hungary is obvious when compared to the reports on other Member States;

Amendment 35 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

Amendment 36 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas in its resolution of 17 April 2020 on EU coordinated action to combat the COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences4 , Parliament falsely deemed totally incompatible with European values the Hungarian Government’s decision to prolong the state of emergency iand~~efinitely, to authorise itself to rule by decree without a time limit, and to weaken the emergency oversight of the Hungarian Parliament~~ created unnecessary political hysteria based on factual errors; whereas the extraordinary powers of the Government have only been exercised insofar as were necessary and proportionate to prevent, tackle and eliminate the COVID-19 outbreak and preventing and combating its detrimental effects; whereas, contrary to the fake news spread also in the European Parliament, the Hungarian National Assembly has been holding regular plenary and committee sessions since the state of danger was proclaimed; whereas in its opinion on the 2020 Convergence Programme of Hungary of 20 July 2020, the Council recommended ensuring that any emergency measures be strictly proportionate, limited in time and in line with European and international standards, that they do not interfere with business activities and the stability of the regulatory environment, and the effective involvement of social partners and stakeholders in the policy-making process; _________________ 4 OJ C 316, 6.8.2021, p. 2.

Amendment 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas in its resolution of 17 April 2020 on EU coordinated action to combat the COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences4, Parliament deemed totally incompatible with European values the Hungarian Government’s decision to prolong the state of emergency indefinitely~~, to authorise its~~; whereas the government nevertheless only used extraordinary powers when required and proportionatelfy to ~~rule by decree without a time limit, and to weaken the emergency oversight of the Hungarian Parliament~~prevent, tackle and eradicate the COVID-19 epidemic and to prevent and tackle the adverse effects thereof, and that the Hungarian Parliament dealt with this situation in due manner; whereas in its opinion on the 2020 Convergence Programme of Hungary of 20 July 2020, the Council recommended ensuring that any emergency measures be strictly proportionate, limited in time and in line with European and international standards, that they do not interfere with business activities and the stability of the regulatory environment, and the effective involvement of social partners and stakeholders in the policy-making process; whereas such situations, in whole or in part, have also occurred in many other Member States and should be subject to equally thorough investigations; _________________ 4 OJ C 316, 6.8.2021, p. 2.

Amendment 38 #

Ramona STRUGARIU, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Moritz KÖRNER, Malik AZMANI, Abir AL-SAHLANI, Olivier CHASTEL, Anna Júlia DONÁTH, Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

Ga. Whereas, on 11 February 2022, the Government issued emergency decree 36/2022. (II. 11.), which determined the "necessary minimum services" that must be provided during a strike under the law on strikes in such a broad manner that made a strike impossible; whereas the decree restricted the rights of teachers who had announced plans to strike on 16 March 2022 without a legitimate aim, in an arbitrary and disproportionate manner, and prevented them from seeking meaningful judicial remedy;

Amendment 39 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

Ga. whereas changes brought to the electoral code over the years through constituency reshaping and winner compensation are disadvantaging opposition parties; whereas in response to worries over the fairness of the elections and appeals from civil society, the OSCE decided to send a full-scale international election observation mission for the general elections held 3 April 2022, which is a rare occurrence regarding EU Member States;

Amendment 4 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 a (new)

— having regard to the Commission Communication of 11 November 2014 entitled ‘A new EU Framework to strengthen the Rule of Law’,

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

Ga. Whereas on 20 July 2020, the Council recommended in its opinion on the 2020 Convergence Programme of Hungary to ensure that any emergency measures be strictly proportionate, limited in time and in line with European and international standards and do not interfere with business activities and the stability of the regulatory environment, to ensure effective involvement of social partners and stakeholders in the policy- making process;

Amendment 41 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)

Gb. Whereas on 25 September 2020, in its second interim compliance report, the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) welcomed the amendments to the Act on the National Assembly to make the provisions prohibiting or restricting members of parliament (MPs) to engage in certain activities more operational by providing for clearer consequences in case these matters are not resolved by the MP in question; however, more determined measures remained necessary to improve the current integrity framework of Parliament, in particular to improve the level of transparency and consultation in the legislative process (including the introduction of rules on interactions with lobbyists), to adopt a code of conduct for MPs (covering in particular various situations that could lead to a conflict of interest), to further develop rules obliging MPs to disclose in an ad-hoc manner potential conflicts between their parliamentary work and their private interests, to ensure a uniform format of asset declarations and to review the broad immunity enjoyed by MPs as well as to ensure the effective supervision and enforcement of rules of conduct, conflict of interest and asset declarations;

Amendment 42 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)

Gb. Whereas new Bills submitted by the Hungarian Minister of Justice to the Parliament on 3 May 2022 raise serious concerns as a possible use the war in Ukraine as a pretext to keep government's excessive regulatory powers; whereas Bill T/25 would amend the Fundamental Law for the 10th time, in a way that a state of danger could be declared by the Government in the case of "an armed conflict, war or humanitarian disaster in a neighbouring country"; whereas Bill T/26 would amend the Disaster Management Act (Act CXXVIII of 2011)allowing the Government to override Acts of Parliament via emergency decrees in any area during a state of danger declared due to an armed conflict, war or humanitarian disaster in a neighbouring country, with a potential to suspend or restrict the exercise of fundamental rights beyond the extent permissible in ordinary circumstances;

Amendment 43 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G c (new)

Gc. Whereas on 20 November 2020, in her statement, the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe urged Hungary’s Parliament to postpone the vote on draft bills fearing that several proposals contained in the complex legislative package, submitted without prior consultation and relating to matters including the functioning of the judiciary, election law, national human rights structures, scrutiny over public funds, and the human rights of LGBTI people, could serve to undermine democracy, the rule of law and human rights in Hungary; whereas on 2 July 2021, in its opinion on the constitutional amendments adopted by the Hungarian Parliament in December 2020, the Venice Commission noted with concern that the constitutional amendments were adopted during a state of emergency, without any public consultation, and the explanatory memorandum consists of only three pages; whereas the Venice Commission also indicated that Articles 6 and 9, and 11 of the Ninth Amendment amending the Fundamental Law of Hungary relating to declarations of war, control of the Hungarian Defence Forces, and the “special legal order” that pertains to state of war, state of emergency and state of danger mainly leave the specification of most details to Cardinal Acts, which could eventually raise some serious questions regarding the scope of the powers of the State during states of exception; whereas, as concerns the abolition of the National Defence Council and the entrusting of its powers to the government, the Venice Commission indicated that, while it is not contrary as such to European standards, it leads to a concentration of emergency powers in the hands of the executive which cannot be considered an encouraging sign, notably in the absence of any clarification in the explanatory memorandum for the ratio or the necessity of such modification; whereas the pending proposal for a constitutional amendment expands the government’s mandate to declare a state of danger to cases of an armed conflict, war or humanitarian disaster in a neighbouring country;

Amendment 44 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Gd. Whereas on 12 February 2021, the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe noted a generally negative situation in terms of local and regional self- government, due to a general failure to comply with the European Charter of Local Self-Government and expressed concerns about a clear trend towards recentralisation, a lack of effective consultation and significant interference by the State in municipal functions; whereas it highlighted certain shortcomings in the situation of local self- government in the country, such as a lack of financial resources available to local authorities and their inability to recruit high quality staff;

Amendment 45 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital G e (new)

Ge. Whereas on 18 October 2021, in their joint opinion on the 2020 amendments to electoral legislation, the Venice Commission and the OSCE/ODIHR stressed that the speed and the lack of meaningful public consultations are particularly worrisome when they concern electoral legislation, which should not be seen as a political instrument; they also made the key recommendation to amend Section 3 and Section 68 of the Act CLXVII of 2020 on the Amendment of Certain Acts relating to Elections, by significantly reducing the number of single-member constituencies and the number of counties in which each party needs to nominate candidates simultaneously in order to be able to run a national list of candidates, as well as a number of further recommendations;

Amendment 46 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital G f (new)

Gf. Whereas on 4 April 2022, in the Statement of Preliminary Findings and Conclusions following the Parliamentary Elections and Referendum, the OSCE international election observation mission stated that the 3 April parliamentary elections and referendum were well administered and professionally managed but marred by the absence of a level playing field; whereas contestants were largely able to campaign freely, but while competitive, the campaign was highly negative in tone and characterized by a pervasive overlap between the ruling coalition and the government, and he lack of transparency and insufficient oversight of campaign finances further benefited the governing coalition; the manner in which many election disputes were handled by election commissions and courts fell short of providing effective legal remedy;

Amendment 47 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas on 20 July 2021, the Commission indicated in the country chapter on Hungary of the 2021 Rule of Law Report that the Hungarian justice system performs well in terms of the length of proceedings and has a high level of digitalisation, and that the gradual increase in the salaries of judges and prosecutors continues; whereas, as regards judicial independence, the justice system has been subject to new developments adding to existing concerns: the new rules allowing for the appointment of members of the Constitutional Court to the Supreme Court (Kúria) outside the normal procedure have been put into practice and have enabled the election of the new Kúria President, whose position was also endowed with additional powers and who was elected despite an unfavourable opinion from the National Judicial Council (NJC); whereas the recommendation to strengthen judicial independence, made in the context of the European Semester, remains unaddressed, including the need to formally reinforce the powers of the independent NJC to enable it to counterbalance the powers of the President of the National Office for the Judiciary;deleted

Amendment 48 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas on 20 July 2021, the Commission indicated in the country chapter on Hungary of the 2021 Rule of Law Report that the Hungarian justice system performs well in terms of the length of proceedings and has a high level of digitalisthe Commission's Rule of Law Report reflects double standards, and discrimination, a~~nd that the gradual increase in the salaries of judges and prosecut~~gainst Hungary is obvious when compared to the reports continues; whereas, as regards judicial independence, the justice system has been subject to new developments adding to existing concerns: the new rules allowing for the appointment of members of the Constitutional Court to the Supreme Court (Kúria) outside the normal procedure have been put into practice and have enabled the election of the new Kúria President, whose position was also endowed with additional powers and who was elected despite an unfavourable opinion from the National Judicial Council (NJC); whereas the recommendation to strengthen judicial independence, made in the context of the European Semester, remains unadd other Member States; whereas this is the case when it comes to the independence of the judiciary; whereas regarding the effectiveness of the judiciary, even the Commission acknowledged that the Hungarian justice system performs well in terms of the length of proceedings and has a high level of digitalisation, and that the gradual incresased, in~~cluding the need to formally reinforce the powers of the independent NJC to enable it to counterbalance the powers of the President of the National Office for the Judiciary~~ the salaries of judges and prosecutors continues;

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

Amendment 5 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)

— having regard to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties,

Amendment 50 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

Amendment 51 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)

Ha. Whereas on 23 November 2021, in Case C-564/19IS (Illégalité de l’ordonnance de renvoi), the CJEU ruled that Article 267 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding the supreme court of a Member State from declaring, following an appeal in the interests of the law, that a request for a preliminary ruling which has been submitted to the CJEU under Article 267 TFEU by a lower court is unlawful on the ground that the questions referred are not relevant and necessary for the resolution of the dispute in the main proceedings, without, however, altering the legal effects of the decision containing that request; whereas the principle of the primacy of EU law requires that lower court to disregard such a decision of the national supreme court; whereas Article 267 TFEU must be interpreted as precluding disciplinary proceedings from being brought against a national judge on the ground that he or she has made a reference for a preliminary ruling to the CJEU under that provision;

Amendment 52 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital H b (new)

Hb. Whereas on 14 December 2018, in her statement the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe called on Hungary’s President to return to the Parliament the legislative package on administrative courts; whereas on 19 March 2019, in its opinion on the Law on administrative courts and the Law on the entry into force of the Law on administrative courts and certain transitional rules, the Venice Commission stated that the major drawback is that very extensive powers are concentrated in the hands of a few stakeholders and there are no effective checks and balances to counteract those powers;

Amendment 53 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital H c (new)

Hc. Whereas on 21 May 2019, in her Report following the visit to Hungary from 4 to 8 February 2019, the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe noted that a series of reforms of the judiciary in Hungary during the 2010s have drawn concern about their effects on the independence of the judiciary, and in the ordinary court system, questions about the effectiveness of the supervision exercised by the NJC over the President of the NJO have been raised by the recent anomalies observed in the relationship between these judicial institutions with reference to appointment procedures; whereas, while welcoming the recent amendments made to the original legislation on the administrative courts in response to the opinion of the Venice Commission, the Commissioner was not persuaded that the amendments are sufficient in addressing the serious concerns identified by the Venice Commission;

Amendment 54 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital H d (new)

Hd. Whereas in 2019, the Parliament of Hungary decided to postpone the entry into force of the legislative package on administrative courts, and the Government stated that it had abandoned the idea of introducing the separate administrative courts; whereas several important elements of the package were introduced by a series of legislative amendments adopted between 2019–2021;

Amendment 55 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital H e (new)

He. Whereas on 28 November 2019, in her statement the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe urged the Hungarian Parliament to modify a bill affecting the independence of the judiciary; whereas the Commissioner considered that the provisions opening the possibility of administrative authorities to introduce constitutional complaints following unfavourable rulings by the ordinary courts raise concerns about upholding fair trial guarantees for the individual complainant and, coupled with the proposed changes on the qualifications and appointments of judges and the uniformity of jurisprudence, the legislative measures also run the risk of diminishing the independence of individual judges in their core duties and of creating excessive hierarchies within the judicial system;

Amendment 56 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital H f (new)

Hf. Whereas on 16 October 2021, in its opinion on the amendments to the Act on the Organisation and Administration of the Courts and the Act on the Legal Status and Remuneration of Judges, adopted by the Hungarian Parliament in December 2020, the Venice Commission reiterated the recommendations expressed in its 2012 opinion which have not been addressed by the authorities as to the role of the President of the NOJ; whereas the Venice Commission also recommended setting up clear, transparent and foreseeable conditions for the seconded judges to be assigned to a higher position after the period of secondment; whereas the Venice Commission made several recommendations related to the allocation of cases, the power of the President of the Kúria to increase the members of adjudicating panels, the uniformity decisions and the composition of chambers in the uniformity complaint procedure; whereas the Venice Commission also observed that the regime of appointment of the President of the Kúria introduced with the 2019 amendments could pose serious risks of politicisation and important consequences for the independence of the judiciary, or the perception thereof by the public, considering the crucial role of this position in the judicial system;

Amendment 57 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital H g (new)

Hg. Whereas on 25 September 2020, in its second interim compliance report GRECO noted that, as regards judges, no further progress has been reported regarding the three remaining non- implemented recommendations, and GRECO’s findings on the powers of the President of the NJO (both as regards the process of appointing or promoting candidates for judicial positions and the process of re-assigning judges) remain of special significance; as regards prosecutors, GRECO welcomed the entry into force of legislative amendments making the involvement of a disciplinary commissioner compulsory in disciplinary proceedings, however, without saying that recommendation xvii had now been complied with; no progress had been achieved regarding the prolongation of the term of the Prosecutor General, the broad immunity enjoyed by prosecutors and the development of criteria to guide the removal of cases from subordinate prosecutors;

Amendment 58 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU

Motion for a resolution
Recital H h (new)

Hh. Whereas on 15 April 2021, in his communication with the government of Hungary, the UN Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers considered that the appointment of the President of the Kúria may be regarded as an attack to the independence of the judiciary and as an attempt to submit the judiciary to the will of the legislative branch, in violation of the principle of separation of powers; whereas the Special Rapporteur also highlighted that the fact that the President of the Kúria was elected in spite of the manifest objection of the NJC is of particular concern, and the decision to ignore the negative opinion expressed by the NJC may be interpreted as a political statement by the ruling majority that does not consider itself bound to respect judicial independence by abiding to, or at least taking into account the views expressed by the body constitutionally assigned to safe guard the independence of courts and judges; whereas according to the Special Rapporteur, the main effect – if not the main goal – of the reforms of the judicial system has been to hamper the constitutionally protected principle of judicial independence and to enable the legislative and executive branches to interfere with the administration of justice;

Amendment 59 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital H i (new)

Hi. Whereas on 2 December 2021, in its decision concerning the pending enhanced supervision of the execution of the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR) judgments in Gazsó group v. Hungary, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe recalled that this group of cases, the first of which became final in 2003, concerns the structural problem of excessive length of civil, criminal and administrative proceedings and the lack of effective domestic remedies, noted with satisfaction the adoption of the bill introducing a compensatory remedy for excessively long civil proceedings and its impending entry into force on 1 January 2022, but with a view to avoiding the risk of an influx of new applications to the ECtHR, firmly called on the authorities to ensure its Convention-compliant application and invited them to provide the Committee with concrete information on its implementation in practice, and noted the authorities’ timetable for preparing a proposal for a remedy covering other types of judicial proceedings by the end of June 2023; in light of the importance of the matter, its technical nature and the expiry of the deadline set by the ECtHR in its pilot-judgment more than five years ago, strongly encouraged the authorities to explore any possible avenue for accelerating their planning;

Amendment 6 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Citation 7

— having regard to its resolutions of 16 January 2020 and 5 May 2022 on ongoing hearings under Article 7(1) of the TEU regarding Poland and Hungary2 , _________________ 2 OJ C 270, 7.7.2021, p. 91.

Amendment 60 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Hj. Whereas on 9 March 2022, in its interim resolution concerning the pending enhanced supervision of the execution of the ECtHR judgment in Baka v. Hungary, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe strongly urged the authorities to step up their efforts to find ways, in close cooperation with the Secretariat, to introduce the required measures to ensure that a decision by Parliament to impeach the President of the Kúria will be subject to effective oversight by an independent judicial body in line with the ECtHR case- law and recalled, once again, the authorities’ undertaking to evaluate the domestic legislation on the status of judges and the administration of courts, and urged them to present the conclusions of their evaluation, including of the guarantees and safeguards protecting judges from undue interferences, to enable the Committee to make a full assessment as to whether the concerns regarding the ‘chilling effect’ on the freedom of expression of judges caused by the violations in these cases have been dispelled;

Amendment 61 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas on 20 July 2021, the Commission indicated in the country chapter on Hungary of the 2021 Rule of Law Report that the implementation of the anti-corruption strategy is ongoing, but its scope remains limited, and shortcomings persist as regards political party financing, lobbying and ‘revolving doors’; whereas risks of clientelism, favouritism and nepotism in high-level public administration, as well as risks arising from the link between businesses and political actors, remain unaddressed, independent control mechanisms remain insufficient for detecting corruption, and concerns remain regarding the lack of systematic checks and insufficient oversight of asset and interest declarations; whereas new criminal law provisions aim to address foreign bribery and informal payments in healthcare; whereas while the indictment rate for corruption cases is high, and some new high-level corruption cases have been opened since 2020, the track record for the investigation of allegations concerning high-level officials and their immediate circle remains limited;deleted

Amendment 62 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas ~~on 20 July 2021, the Commission indicated in the country chapter on Hungary of the 2021 Rule of Law Report that the implementation of the anti-corruption strategy is ongoing, but~~the Commission's report applies ‘double standards’ as the discrimination against Hungary is clear when its chapter its sco~~pe remains limited, and shortcomings persist as regards political p~~mpared with those on the other Member States, for example with Hungarty ~~financing, lobbying and ‘revolving doors’; whereas risks of clientelism, favouritism and nepotism in high-level public administration, as well as risks arising from the link between~~obtaining one of the top indictment rates on the buasinesses and political actors, remain unaddressed, independent control mechanisms remain insufficient for detecting corruption, and concerns remain regarding the lack of systematic checks and insufficient oversight of asset and interest declarationss of OLAF's recommendations, with a result of 67%, which is almost twice as high as the EU average; whereas new criminal law provisions aim to address foreign bribery and informal payments in healthcare; whereas while the indictment rate for corruption cases is high, and some new high-level corruption cases have been opened since 2020~~, the track record for the investigation of allegations concerning high-level officials and their immediate circle remains limited~~;

Amendment 63 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

Amendment 64 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas ~~on 20 July 2021, the Commission indicated in the country chapter on Hungary of the 2021 Rule of Law Report that the implementation of the anti-corrupti~~the Commission's Rule of Law Report reflects double standards, and discrimination against Hungary is obvious when compared to the reports on other Member States; whereas this is clearly demon strate~~gy is ongoing, but its scope remains limited, and shortcomings persist as regards political p~~d by the fact the Commission portrays the situation more concerning in Hungary even though under several indicators Hungarty ~~financing, lobbying and ‘revolving doors’; whereas risks of clientelism, favouritism and nepotism in high-level public administration, as well as risks arising from~~performs better than other Member States; whereas, for example, the indictment rate based on OLAF recommendations in Hungary is 67% which is nearly twice as much as EU average; whereas according to the lSink between businesses and political actors, remain unaddressed, independent control mechanisms remain insufficient for detecting corruption, and concerns remain regarding the lack of systematic checks and insufficient oversight of asset and interest declarations; whereas new criminal law provisions aim to address foreign bribery and informal payments in healthcare; whereas while the indictment rate for corruption cases is high, and some new high-level corruption cases have been opened since 2020, the track record for the investigation of allegations concerning high-level officials and their immediate circle remains limitedgle Market Scoreboard, as in previous years, Hungary's overall performance in the field of public procurement is "average", compared to nine Member States, where the overall performance is qualified as "unsatisfactory"; whereas new criminal law provisions aim to address foreign bribery and informal payments in healthcare;

Amendment 65 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)

Ia. Whereas in written answers to questions to Commissioner Hahn regarding the hearing of 11 November 2019 on the 2018 discharge to the Commission, the Commission indicated that for 2014-2020, flat rate financial corrections were accepted and implemented in Hungary following an horizontal public procurement audit, that identified serious deficiencies in the functioning of the management and control system in relation to the control of public procurement procedures;

Amendment 66 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital I b (new)

Ib. Whereas on 20 July 2020, the Council recommended in its opinion on the 2020 Convergence Programme of Hungary to improve competition in public procurement;

Amendment 67 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

Amendment 68 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

Amendment 69 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas on 10 June 2021, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) stated in its 2020 Activity Report that it had recommended that the Commission recover 2.2 % of the payments made under the European Structural and Investment Funds and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development for the period 2016- 2020; whereas this is the highest percentage of payments to be recovered among all the Member States and is far above the average of 0.29 %; whereas fraud committed against EU development funds allocated to Hungary is a direct attack on the wealth and wellbeing of Hungarian citizens; whereas the Hungarian government, consistently and deliberately turns a blind eye on high level corruption committed by politicians, their family members and oligarchs close to the government.

Amendment 7 #

Ramona STRUGARIU, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Moritz KÖRNER, Malik AZMANI, Abir AL-SAHLANI, Olivier CHASTEL, Anna Júlia DONÁTH, Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8

— having regard to its resolution of 8 July 2021 on breaches of EU law and of the rights of LGBTIQ citizens in Hungary as a result of the legal changes adopted by the Hungarian Parliament3, _________________ 3 OJ C 99, 1.3.2022, p. 218.deleted

Amendment 70 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital J a (new)

Ja. whereas in November 2021 the European Commission has sent letters to both Hungary and Poland underlying problems with the independence of the judiciary, ineffective prosecution of corruption, and deficiencies in public procurement which could pose a risk to the EU’s financial interests; whereas in its letter to Hungary, the Commission described systemic problems and lack of accountability for corruption in, posing 16 specific questions to the Hungarian authorities on issues such as conflicts of interest, who benefits from EU funding, and how judicial review by independent courts is guaranteed; whereas despite these concerns, the European Commission delayed the application of the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation 1a with respect to Hungary and Poland thereby undermining the credibility of the Union when it comes to defending human rights, freedom, democracy, equality and the rule of law as set out in Article 2 of the Treaty of the EU; _________________ 1a Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget, OJ L 433 I , 22.12.2020, p. 1

Amendment 71 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

Amendment 72 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas on 5 April 2022, the Commission President announced that Commissioner for Budget Johannes Hahn had informed the Hungarian authorities about the Commission’s plans to move on to the next step and formally trigger the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation5, mainly over corruption concerns; whereas the Rule of Law Regulation is not intended to protect the rule of law, but only to protect the EU budget, and the Commission should strictly comply with procedural requirements when applying it, including, in particular, a genuine link between the possible infringement and the impact or serious risk of impact on the sound financial management of the EU or its financial interests; _________________ 5 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget, OJ L 433 I , 22.12.2020, p. 1.

Amendment 73 #

Ramona STRUGARIU, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Moritz KÖRNER, Malik AZMANI, Abir AL-SAHLANI, Olivier CHASTEL, Anna Júlia DONÁTH, Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas on 5 April 2022, the Commission President announced that Commissioner for Budget Johannes Hahn had informed the Hungarian authorities about the Commission’s plans to move on to the next step and formally trigger the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation5 ~~, mainly over corruption concerns~~; whereas the Hungarian Government claims that no structural issues that would justify any well-founded rule-of-law related concern as regards the protection of the EU budget exists; whereas the fact that the procedure was announced only two days after the general elections and the landmark victory of the ruling parties in Hungary substantiates the political nature of the procedure; _________________ 5 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget, OJ L 433 I , 22.12.2020, p. 1.

Amendment 74 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas on 5 April 2022, the Commission President announced that Commissioner for Budget Johannes Hahn had informed the Hungarian authorities about the Commission’s plans to move on to the next step and formally trigger the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation5 , mainly over corruption concerns; whereas on 27 April 2022, the Commission finally started the formal procedure against Hungary under the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation by sending a written notification; _________________ 5 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget, OJ L 433 I , 22.12.2020, p. 1.

Amendment 75 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas on 5 April 2022, the Commission President announced that Commissioner for Budget Johannes Hahn had informed the Hungarian authorities about the Commission’s plans to move on to the next step and formally trigger the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation5 , mainly over corruption concerns; whereas on 27 April 2022, the Commission finally started the formal procedure against Hungary under the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation by sending a written notification; _________________ 5 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget, OJ L 433 I , 22.12.2020, p. 1.

Amendment 76 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)

Ka. Whereas on 6 April 2022, the Commission decided to send additional formal notice to ensure correct transposition of Directive2014/24/EU on public procurement, Directive 2014/23/EU on the award of concession contracts and Directive 2014/25/EU on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors; whereas, according to the Commission, Hungarian law allows for more extensive application of exceptions as regards security reasons and for contracts subsidised via tax benefits, and these exceptions lead to a broader exclusion of contracts from the obligations under EU law; whereas in addition, the Commission also believes that changes in the Hungarian mining law, which provide for the possibility to award mining concessions without transparent tendering procedures, are against the principle of transparency;

Amendment 77 #

Ramona STRUGARIU, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Moritz KÖRNER, Malik AZMANI, Abir AL-SAHLANI, Olivier CHASTEL, Anna Júlia DONÁTH, Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA

Ka. whereas on 24th of July 2020 the removal of Hungary’s top independent news portal index.hu editor-in-chief prompted the collective resignation of more than 70 journalists who were denouncing clear interference and governmental pressure on their media outlet; whereas in recent years critical voices have been silenced, most independent outlets have either gone out of business, or have been bought by government allies and received lucrative flows of state advertising;

Amendment 78 #

Ramona STRUGARIU, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Moritz KÖRNER, Malik AZMANI, Abir AL-SAHLANI, Olivier CHASTEL, Anna Júlia DONÁTH, Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA

Motion for a resolution
Recital K b (new)

Kb. whereas the consolidation of over 470 media outlets under KESMA (Central European Press and Media Foundation) has had dramatic impacts in terms of shrinking of the space available for independent and opposition media and access to information for the Hungarian citizens; whereas the funds spent for public media and KESMA are essentially used for government propaganda and discrediting the opposition and non- governmental organizations; whereas the manipulation of media ownership, state capture of regulators and formerly independent outlets, government advertising revenue and the granting of licenses are methods by which the media environment can be skewed in favour of the government and are already exported in other parts in Europe;

Amendment 79 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital K b (new)

Kb. Whereas on 25 September 2020, in its second interim compliance report, GRECO noted that Hungary had still only implemented satisfactorily or dealt in a satisfactory manner five of the eighteen recommendations contained in the Fourth Round Evaluation Report and concluded that the overall low level of compliance with the recommendations remains "globally unsatisfactory";

Amendment 8 #

Ramona STRUGARIU, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Moritz KÖRNER, Malik AZMANI, Olivier CHASTEL, Anna Júlia DONÁTH, Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA, Abir AL-SAHLANI

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)

— having regard to the country chapter on Hungary in the 2020 Rule of Law Report,

Amendment 80 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital K c (new)

Kc. whereas according to the study financed by the European Commission conducted by the European federation of Journalists (EFJ), the Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom (CMPF) at the European University Institute in Florence, Mapping Media Freedom, released in July 2020, the coronavirus crisis had arguably the biggest effect on media freedom in Hungary; whereas the new legislation against the spreading of “false” or “distorted” information, passed during the state of emergency in Hungary, caused uncertainty and self- censorship among media outlets and actors;

Amendment 81 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital K c (new)

Kc. Whereas in the mission report following the ad-hoc LIBE delegation to Budapest, Hungary on 29 September - 1 October 2021, concerns were raised about the lack of safeguards as regards surveillance in the current legislation, with no real checks and balances and remedies; whereas concerns were raised on the alleged use of the Pegasus spyware and increased surveillance by the state against activists, journalists and lawyers;

Amendment 82 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital K d (new)

Kd. Whereas on 15 February 2022, the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) in the preliminary remarks on modern spyware concluded that the widespread use of highly-advanced spywares like Pegasus have the potential to cause unprecedented risks and damages not only to fundamental rights and freedoms but also to democracy and the rule of law and indicated that a ban on the development and the deployment of spyware with the capacity of Pegasus in the EU would be the most effective option to protect fundamental rights and freedoms;

Amendment 83 #

Ramona STRUGARIU, Lucia ĎURIŠ NICHOLSONOVÁ, Moritz KÖRNER, Malik AZMANI, Abir AL-SAHLANI, Olivier CHASTEL, Anna Júlia DONÁTH, Maite PAGAZAURTUNDÚA

Motion for a resolution
Recital K d (new)

Kd. whereas in July 2021 the investigative portal Direkt36 revealed, based on a leaked database, that about 300 Hungarian citizens - among which journalists, lawyers, politicians, businesspeople critical of the government, former state officials- were targeted by the Pegasus spyware of the Israeli NSO Group between 2018 and 2021; whereas these revelations raised concerns about politically motivated surveillance against Hungarian citizens and the abuse of the NSO spyware;

Amendment 84 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital K e (new)

Ke. Whereas on 9 March 2022, in its decision concerning the pending enhanced supervision of the execution of the ECtHR judgment in Szabó and Vissy v. Hungary, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe recalled that this case concerns the violation of the applicants’ right to respect for their private and family life and for their correspondence on account of the Hungarian legislation on national security-related measures of secret surveillance, which lacked safeguards sufficiently precise, effective and comprehensive on the ordering, execution and potential redressing of these measures, highlighted that secret surveillance should be regarded as a highly intrusive act that potentially interferes with the rights to freedom of expression and privacy and threatens the foundations of a democratic society and recalling that in response to the ECtHR judgment the authorities announced in 2017 the need for a legislative reform, and noted with serious concern that, despite this the legislative process is still at a preliminary stage and the authorities have not presented any other relevant developments; therefore, strongly called on the authorities to urgently adopt the measures required to bring the domestic legislation fully in line with the Convention requirements, establish a timeline for the legislative process and to present to the Committee a draft legislative proposal;

Amendment 85 #

Amendment 86 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L

Amendment 87 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L

Amendment 88 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L

L. whereas on 20 July 2021, the Commission indicated in the country chapter on Hungary of the 2021 Rule of Law Report that media pluralism remains at risk and that concerns persist with regard to the independence and effectiveness of the Media Authority, also in the light of the Media Council’s decisions leading to independent radio station Klubrádió being taken off air; whereas while no media support schemes were established to counter the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on news media outlets, significant amounts of state advertising have continued to permit the government to exert indirect political influence over the media; whereas access to public information was tightened through emergency measures introduced during the pandemic, making timely access to such information harder for independent media outlets; whereas independent media outlets and journalists continue to face obstruction and intimidationthe Commission's Rule of Law Report does not present an objective and substantiated picture of the media situation in Hungary, which is clearly more balanced than in other Western European countries when it comes to the plurality of opinions and the liveliness of public debate; whereas both right-wing, conservative views as well as left-wing, liberal views are equally represented in the Hungarian media which is not the case in many other Member States; whereas the Commission and the Parliament aim to interfere in individual matters which belong to the competence of national constitutional bodies; whereas the case of Klubrádió is a clear an example of this;

Amendment 89 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L

Amendment 9 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 b (new)

— having regard to country chapter on Hungary in the 2021 Rule of Law Report,

Amendment 90 #

Gwendoline DELBOS-CORFIELD, Isabel WISELER-LIMA, Bettina VOLLATH, Ramona STRUGARIU, Malin BJÖRK

Motion for a resolution
Recital L a (new)

La. whereas the Government has taken several steps to react to the economic and social consequences of the pandemic and considerable support has been provided for the artistic sector and for media as well; whereas the work of journalists in Hungary is not threatened by physical or other attacks or atrocities - unlike in other EU countries; whereas on the Council of Europe Platform on the Safety of Journalists there have not been any reported alerts on attacks on physical safety and integrity of journalists in Hungary in the last 5 years, while there are other Western-European Member States where only in 2021 5 such alerts have been published;

Amendment 91 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital L a (new)

La. Whereas on 2 December 2021, the Commission decided to send a reasoned opinion regarding a decision made by the Hungarian Media Council to reject Klubradio's application for the use of radio spectrum; whereas the Commission concluded that the decisions of the Hungarian Media Council to refuse renewal of Klubradio's rights were disproportionate and non-transparent, and the Hungarian national media law has been applied in a discriminatory way in this particular case, in breach of Directive (EU)2018/1972 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018establishing the European Electronic Communications Code;

Amendment 92 #