The EP would deny the Hungarian government a unique opportunity, but the real threat lies elsewhere

“Hungary will be the political centre of Europe in the second half of 2024!”

Judit Varga's statement shows what the Hungarian government expects from taking over the rotating presidency of the Council of the European Union from the middle of next year. And the excitement is not without reason, as she will be in a unique position to take on the background tasks that usually involve organisation, legal paperwork and the continuation of much of the inherited tasks. In a fortuitous coincidence, she will take over the post, which was first filled in 2011, at a time when there will be changes in other important EU bodies, and this will also provide a rare opportunity for the presidency.

“Viktor Orbán will be in a position to influence a variety of things, especially in the run-up to the negotiations for the main posts.”

- an EU official told EUobserver.

EP would dispute eligibility

It is this exceptional situation that the European Parliament would tamper with. Under a draft five-party resolution, the representative body would debate whether the Hungarian government – which has been preparing for the job in an increasingly visible fashion for months – is qualified for the post, Népszava reported last week. According to the paper, a resolution on the state of the rule of law in Hungary and the freezing of EU funds is to be adopted at the plenary session. The debate is expected on Wednesday, the vote on Thursday.

According to a draft of the document leaked to EUobserver, the panel "questions Hungary's ability to credibly fulfil this task in 2024". The draft justifies their opinion with the principle of "loyal cooperation" by citing shortcomings in respect to abiding by EU law and the core values enshrined in the EU's quasi-constitution. A violation of the latter could lead to the EU

• bringing proceedings under 'Article 7'. At the initiative of the European Parliament, such a procedure has been ongoing against Hungary since 2018.
• Last December, as part of the “conditionality procedure”, by a vote of 25 out of 27 in favour, member states also declared that Hungary was violating the EU's rule of law principles. Only Poland supported the Orbán government.

Although the text is not final and still needs to be voted on, there is broad support for it, as consistent press reports suggest. Although government and Fidesz politicians are talking about a left-wing attack, the centre-right European People's Party, which includes (Fidesz' coalition partner) KDNP in its five supporting groups, is also part of the group. (This doesn't mean that that Hungary's smaller governing party necessarily agrees with the text, and neither would it have to vote in its favour.

The MEPs who tabled the proposal held a press conference on the matter on Wednesday morning, and said they were worried that the Hungarian government could take over the EU presidency for six months next year with an Article 7 case going on against it – and on top of it, it also has friendly relations with Vladimir Putin's Russian regime and the stance of the EU presidency on the war in Ukraine is relevant.

Gwendoline Delbos-Corfield, the French Green MEP who heads the reporting group, has been active on Hungarian affairs for years. "The Hungarian government has in fact already managed to set up its own authoritarian regime," she said. “However, my fellow MEPs and I have decided to launch a debate on whether the Hungarian government should take over the rotating presidency of the Council of the European Union.”

Delbos-Corfield said that while the issue of the Hungarian presidency had previously been pushed aside, she now believes their current protest could have a real outcome. True, she could not say exactly what that result might be, as there has been no precedent for stripping an EU member state of its presidency (an exceptional case will be discussed below). However, her fellow MEP Isabel Wiseler-Lima said it would be the EP's "failure" if they were unable to voice their concerns about the Hungarian presidency next year.

MEPs have no legal say on the matter

At the latest government briefing, Gergely Gulyás, Minister at the Prime Minister's Office, also said that the resolution would "certainly" be adopted. However, the minister also pointed out that the EP has no jurisdiction in the matter. “The consequence of this decision, which will certainly be adopted, is by and large the same as if the Azerbaijani parliament were to take a similar decision.”

Indeed, the European Parliament has no principled role in deciding the order of the presidency. EP decisions have no legal consequences in principle, they only reflect the opinion of the MEPs.

It is only the Council that decides on the order of Presidencies,

as confirmed by European Commission spokesman Eric Mamer on Friday. According to Bernadett Petri, a researcher at the Institute for European Strategy Studies at the NKE (Nemzeti Közszolgálati Egyetem – University of Public Service), the most the European Parliament could try would be an annulment procedure in court.

Or else... what?

But this does not mean that the EP is on the same level as the Azerbaijani parliament. Malin Björk, a member of the smallest, far-left group, told EUobserver that the EP could, for example, stay away from tripartite legislative "trialogues" or it could refrain from inviting members of the Hungarian government to meetings. The Hungarian government would represent all member states in dealings with the other EU institutions, while the Counc would by default decide on legislation together with the EP and the presidency would negotiate on behalf of the member states.

At Wednesday's press conference, Dutch MEP Sophie in 't Veld also said that "we need to strip this presidency of all its glamour: no group photo, no joint press conference. Instead of offering a podium to Orbán and his cronies, we should offer a podium to those who are being silenced in Hungary". She also said that cooperation between the European Parliament and the Hungarian EU presidency should be reduced to the "lowest possible level" in EU legislative work.

Earlier, Gwendoline Delbos-Corfield had told Politico that the political groups had not gone as far as boycotting the presidency. This would only have a limited impact anyway, given the summer reshuffle.

• The European Parliament will be re-elected in May,
• then the same will happen with European Commission, which makes EU proposals,
• while the annual summer shutdown is also slowing down work.

Presidencies tend to carry on with the business at hand, but the Hungarian government would be entering at an interim stage. Legislative work is effectively on hold and will only restart in time with the new European Commission, and in addition, the body may drop more proposals. Several MEPs are also leaving, so proposals could be moved between MEPs and the Council will not always have someone to negotiate with (Hungarian Justice Minister Judit Varga suggested on Tuesday that in this situation the Hungarian government could push its own issues to the fore.)

Delbos-Corfield also acknowledged that the EP draft on Hungary is deliberately vague on the presidency because this way it could gain broad support. The text calls on EU governments to "find appropriate solutions as soon as possible". If not, the Parliament can take "appropriate measures" until the issue is resolved.

There has been a similar example before, but not quite the same

In the only case so far where the presidency of a country was skipped despite the preliminary order, it was the Council that decided on its own leadership. According to the pre-established order, the British should have taken over in the second half of the year after the 2016 Brexit referendum. Meanwhile, the other member states were in the process of reaching common ground in the Council on the EU's negotiating terms for an exit deal.

The London government had explicitly asked not to have to deal with the presidency because it was preoccupied, among other things, with its request to leave. It didn't submit the document straight away, so in principle nothing had changed, it was a full member, but the situation meant that they eventually decided to 'skip' the UK.

The EU's quasi-constitution states that the presidency should be allocated "on a rotating basis of equality", which would be incompatible with a similar cancellation of the Hungarian presidency, but postponement is another matter.

How can the Council shift the order of the Presidency?

A few weeks ago, former Foreign Minister Péter Balázs was saying that the 'Article 7' procedure could even affect the Council leadership, and Politico says that the European Parliament text also refers to this procedure.

According to Article 7 of one of the EU's founding treaties, member states may suspend certain rights of a country under the EU's quasi-constitution, such as the right of voting in the Council, in case of a breach of the EU's rule of law. Perhaps this is why Judit Varga, the Justice Minister, along with other Fidesz politicians, has constantly insisted that,

"the EU Presidency is not a right, but an obligation", since Article 7 only mentions the former.

Moreover, the imposition of the penalty is just the latest step on the road that has been stalled for five years since the proceedings were initiated. All that is happening is that occasionally – most recently on Tuesday – the Hungarian government and the Polish government, which was also subject to proceedings in 2017, are heard in the Council. In its last resolution on Hungary, the EP also urged member states to move forward, and Judit Varga spoke of an "ailing" process without political leadership, but member states have not moved to either ending the process or moving forward with it.

A unanimous decision from the other countries would be needed before a punishment could be devised, with the Polish and Hungarian governments almost guaranteed to take each other's side. Even though their relationship has grown cold over the handling of the war in Ukraine, their interdependence is only strengthened by the fact that Poland is to take over the Council presidency from Hungary.

According to the EU's quasi-constitution, however, the order of the rotation is decided by a qualified majority vote. In such cases, the number and population of member states counts, meaning that either a few large ones or several small ones must be gathered to form a blocking minority. As the example of the conditionality procedure shows, the Hungarian government has once already failed to avoid being penalised for rule of law failings under such a voting system.

It is precisely this suspension, and the Article 7 procedure itself, that may make the Hungarian presidency look odd, because both are decided in the Council

- i.e. it could be that the government would have to appoint and chair the meetings where the others could be making decisions about it. The EU's quasi-constitution provides for an "honest broker" role, but the presidency can influence Council decisions, for example by setting the agenda and organising meetings (one idea of the Dutch Meiers Committee is that the running of the cases relating to the rule of law should be handed over to someone else).

The threat seems remote but it's not completely unfounded

In any case, the government's attention should be focused not on the EP but on the Council itself. Last week Justice Minister Judit Varga said that "the European Parliament has not been dealt a hand", but those who have, have not even considered that Hungary should not assume its rightful post.

Citing two EU officials, Politico reported on Tuesday that EU affairs ministers may try to find out at Tuesday's meeting of the General Affairs Council what everybody thinks about the postponement of the Hungarian presidency.

At Tuesday's Council meeting, there was no formal discussion of the Hungarian presidency. On behalf of the current Swedish presidency, Jessica Roswell said the issue was not discussed as part of the meeting and was not on the agenda.

However, the government cannot relax just yet, because while most of the ministers who came to the meeting were cautious, a few statements also suggested that the question of postponing the presidency is still on the table.

German State Secretary for EU affairs Anna Lührmann for example expressed doubts about the Hungarian EU presidency.

She said Hungary that Hungary was currently isolated in the EU because of serious problems with the rule of law and its reluctance to stand by Ukraine, which is suffering from a war of aggression. (In the Council, ministers from member states meet by topic. Only the foreign affairs meetings are not chaired by the rotating presidency, but other formations may also be concerned with matters relating to Ukraine.) Dutch Foreign Minister Wopke Hoekstra also expressed "feeling uncomfortable" about the Hungarian EU presidency. In response to a question, he said: “We all feel this way.”

Two member states are hardly enough for a qualified majority – they would need at least 13 more – but if they were to join forces with the most populous EU country, Germany, they would make the biggest possible step towards meeting the other condition of 65 percent of the population being represented.

Doubts surrounding the presidency could provide another reason to meet the rule of law criteria as soon as possible

The government's position could even improve as the time of the Hungarian presidency approaches. The debate on the rule of law may ease next year – if only because a lot of money is at stake and the government has more important reasons than the presidency to hurry.

Removing the doubts around the presidency could be another reason to meet the rule of law conditionality as soon as possible, especially as budget commissioner Johannes Hahn says the end of discussions could be pushed back to the summer of 2024, around the start of the presidency.

The government's expectations may be boosted by the fact that its current isolation could be alleviated by

• new right-wing governments, according to the pro-government Nézőpont Institute. In Spain, which is more populous and thus has more weight in the Council, early elections are due in less than two months, with polls suggesting that the centre-right People's Party could even join forces with the far-right, Fidesz-friendly Vox party to take power (And all this during the Spanish presidency of the Council.)
• The EP elections could also provide an opportunity for Fidesz, which is currently without a group, to join forces with several parties close to it and even organise a far-right conservative group bigger than the current ones. However, not much has come of these plans in recent years.

In the meantime, the presidency could give an opportunity for the Orbán government to play a role in the distribution of important posts. Heads of state and government nominate the next Commission president in the nominally similar but separate European Council. At a lower level, the Council, which is a separate institution, is also involved in preparing the European Council's decisions, and Hungary will not only chair the meetings of ministers but also, at a lower level, the meetings of the permanent representatives of the Member States and the working groups.

The legislative break means less work for the presidency, but it still offers the opportunity to promote the country – and the government. Informal meetings are usually held in the Member State chairing the Council, and are usually accompanied by a number of events in the country holding the presidency and across the EU.