Enlarge image
Hungarian Prime Minister Orbán, EU Commission President von der Leyen (February 2020)
Photo: Francois Lenoir / REUTERS
There was great applause when Ursula von der Leyen promised a clear edge against Viktor Orbán three months ago.
"We have activated the rule of law mechanism," said the President of the EU Commission coolly in the European Parliament.
It will now be set in motion “according to the prescribed schedule”.
Finally, it seemed, the EU wanted to cut off the money supply to the Hungarian prime minister because of his continued violations of democracy and the separation of powers.
Since then, the parties to the dispute have been spying on each other in their ongoing conflict that has been smoldering for years.
Orbán provoked the EU by objecting to sanctions against Russia or corporate taxes.
Sometimes he sent emissaries to Brussels who signaled concessions in terms of the rule of law.
Von der Leyen, in turn, reiterated her criticism of Orbán, but promised in a similar dispute with Poland that blocked EU funds would soon flow again.
Is it possible, many in Brussels are now asking themselves, that even the strong man in Budapest can expect leniency?
Withhold funds "100 percent."
If leading lawyers have their way, this scenario must not happen under any circumstances.
Legal scholars Kim Lane Scheppele (Princeton), Daniel Kehleman (Uni New Jersey) and John Morijn (Uni Groningen) have examined the case on behalf of the Green Group in the European Parliament.
And what they publish about it is suitable for giving new dynamics to the debate.
In their 32-page report, the professors come to the conclusion that the EU Commission should not only cut funds from the country's various agricultural, cohesion and reconstruction budgets.
They even consider it "appropriate" and "proportionate" to cut Hungary off from any money flow from Brussels.
Because the country violates democratic principles "fundamentally, regularly and extensively" in this way, the "legitimacy of the allocation of EU funds" in Hungary is generally at risk.
That's why the experts consider it "appropriate" for Brussels to "hold back 100 percent of the money."
It's like a "lead drinking water pipe," argues the legal trio: as long as the poisoned pipe system has not been replaced, every drop of water that flows through it must be "considered contaminated."
The result not only puts pressure on the EU Commission to press ahead with the proceedings against Orbán.
It also hits the autocratic head of government in his most sensitive area.
For years, the head of government has presented himself as a defender of Western values against an allegedly overly foreign-friendly and decadent EU.
At the same time, Orbán is happy to accept the billions from Brussels in order to reward family members and political favorites on a large scale and to tailor the political system to himself.
As a result, neither the administration nor the auditors nor the country's courts are in a position to take action against "systemic corruption" in Hungary.
As long as this does not change, "the financial interests of the EU can only be defended by stopping the flow of money one hundred percent," says the report.
The register of sins that the lawyers open is long.
Orbán has used his parliamentary majorities to curtail the rights of the opposition through repeated changes to the constitution.
For more than two years he has ruled with the help of emergency laws that give him dictatorial powers.
That in itself is a violation of the rule of law.
Roadmap for far-reaching reforms
Orbán used his political power to bring the judiciary under control.
He has appointed partisans to the constitutional court, ousted independent judges from office and expanded the powers of the country's politically influenced supreme court.
According to the study, Orbán has also subjected the authorities responsible for controlling state finances and awarding public contracts to his influence.
The experts deduce from a number of violations in recent years that EU funds are therefore misused on a large scale.
The Hungarian government has repeatedly ignored the results of the EU fraud investigation agency OLAF.
And according to a commission study, a large number of public contracts have gone to a small number of companies whose owners are closely linked to the Orbán system.
The Hungarian violations of the rule of law are "inherent in the system," judge the lawyers.
A "proportional" reaction is therefore necessary, as required by the EU rules.
The lawyers are demanding that the flow of EU funds into the country must be stopped completely.
Many members of the European Parliament see it that way.
"After 60 infringement procedures, our patience with Orbán is exhausted," says Green MEP Daniel Freund.
"European rules demand that all EU funds to Hungary be immediately frozen." At the same time, the Commission must present a roadmap for far-reaching reforms in the country's political system, which Orbán must follow.
The Green MEP is concerned that von der Leyen could go too far to accommodate the Hungarian head of government in order to maintain EU unity in the Ukraine war.
In the similar dispute with Poland, von der Leyen is already threatening to be satisfied with cosmetic corrections, Freund warns.
“It must not come to that in the case of Hungary.”
The Green MP is not alone.
When the legal opinion is presented this Wednesday, the representatives of the conservative, liberal and social-democratic groups in the EU Parliament will also be sitting by its side.
They all also demand consistent action against the head of government, whom von der Leyen's predecessor Jean-Claude Juncker liked to call a "dictator".
"Money is the lever that impresses Orbán," says Freund. "We have to use this lever."