Hungary defies EU pressure with new sovereignty act Europe turning against Budapest

"Freedom-loving" Europe is turning against Azerbaijan, Georgia and Hungary. Moreover, the attempts at exerting pressure are made with a clear focus on criticising the actions taken by these countries to strengthen their sovereignty and national independence.

On October 3, information was revealed about the European Commission's preparation of a lawsuit against Hungary, which is set to be submitted to the European Court of Justice. This action stems from Hungary's recent enactment of the National Sovereignty Protection Act, which leaders of the EU member states perceive as a "violation of EU law." There’s a clear presence of discontent among leaders of the EU member states - who always boast about their proclaimed support for human rights and freedoms - regarding the actions taken by the Hungarian government to strengthen the country's sovereignty.

Hungary's parliament passed the "National Sovereignty Protection Act" back in December 2023. The primary objective of the law, as outlined by its proponents from Prime Minister Viktor Orbán's ruling Fidesz party, is to "reduce the risks of foreign interference in the country’s affairs." This includes provisions for up to three years of imprisonment for any election candidate receiving funds from abroad, as well as the establishment of an agency "to monitor interference risks with broad investigative powers." This immediately caught the attention of the European Commission, which expressed concern regarding the law. The Council of Europe quickly chimed in as well, urging Budapest to abandon the legislation due to the "significant risks it poses to human rights."

However, despite all these biased approaches, a new government agency for the protection of sovereignty began operating in Hungary in January 2024. In response, the US Department of State could not remain silent, expressing its "concern over the incompatibility" of these developments "with our shared values of democracy, individual freedom, and the rule of law."

As Caliber.Az has reported, the EU's anti-Hungarian stance closely resembles the blatant pressure exerted on Georgia. 

For example, just as Western political circles attacked Tbilisi (both financially and ideologically) for the adoption of the country's Law on Transparency of Foreign Influence, the European Commission used the same tactics regarding Budapest, issuing an ultimatum to abandon the approved document.   The essence of this situation culminated in the European Commission's preparation of a lawsuit against Hungary, arguing that "a thorough assessment of the Hungarian authorities' response to the aforementioned concerns confirmed the lack of consideration for most of the identified complaints." These complaints pertain to several fundamental rights enshrined in the EU Charter: the right to respect for private and family life, freedom of expression and information, and freedom of association. How does the Hungarian sovereignty law contradict regarding the right to respect for private and family life? Should we really be surprised by the strong negative reaction from EU officials to legislation that reflects the interests of Hungarians?

Budapest faced similar "obstruction" in 2021 when the country's parliament passed a bill banning so-called "gay propaganda" at schools, specifically prohibiting discussions on homosexuality and transgender issues. In this context, it is also worth recalling the summer 2024 report from the European Commission on the rule of law, which stated that Hungary is "lagging behind EU democratic standards." Moreover, the EU froze financial assistance to Budapest amounting to 30 billion euros, citing one of the reasons as the lack of "independence in the country's judiciary." However, a portion of the frozen funds eventually reached Hungary for a rather pragmatic reason: the unfreezing was necessary because Brussels needed the Hungarian government's approval to continue rendering military and financial aid to Ukraine.

These are the "Brussels games," with a direct accusation against Budapest for creating a "real systemic problem". How does empowering Hungary's Sovereignty Protection Office to investigate foreign-funded activities influencing elections or acknowledging that this law responds to illegal encroachments on Hungary's sovereignty constitute a systemic problem? It's probably clear and doesn't require any special commentary.

Therefore, we'll conclude by noting that Budapest, undeterred by the financial and ideological pressures from Brussels, continues pursuing an independent policy.   On October 3, the German ambassador was summoned to the Hungarian Foreign Ministry after certain remarks, including the statement about Hungary "moving down a path that leads it away from its friends," were deemed "completely unacceptable" and a "blatant interference in the internal affairs of the country" by Budapest.

In this context, Hungarian Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Péter Szijjártó expressed Hungary's expectation of "respect from all foreign ambassadors operating in Hungary." Thus, Hungary remains among the nations that, despite any obstacles, refuse to abandon the defence of the national interests and the interests of people.