Role Models of Politics Disguised in Technique
Cases C-78/18 on Associative Transparency and C-66/18 on Academic Freedom in Hungary
Keywords:European Union law, rule of law, infringement proceedings, fundamental rights, transparency of associations, academic freedom, Hungary
The article analyses two decisions of the European Court of Justice issued last year against Hungary, with the aim of outlining a new trend in the Court’s caselaw, where threats to the rule of law are confronted without making express reference to it. The profiles of the two judgements that are investigated are three, and namely: the timing of the procedures, the role of discrimination in the assessment of violations of the TFEU rules on the freedom of movement of capital and services, the assessment of violations of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union alongside TFEU violations. The purpose of the article is to prove that the infringement procedure under Art. 258 TFEU can be successfully used to hinder antidemocratic drifts and illiberal trends even when a case is designed as purely technical and the rule of law is not called in, which may ultimately shield the Court itself from accusations of being too politically involved in Member States’ affairs.
Adamski, D. (2019). The social contract of democratic backsliding in the “new EU” countries. Common Market Law Review, 56(3), 623–666.
Bárd, P. (2019). The von der Leyen Commission and the Future of the Rule of Law. VerfBlog. https://doi.org/10.17176/20191112-033639-0
Bárd, P. (2020a). The Hungarian “Lex NGO” before the CJEU: Calling an Abuse of State Power by its Name. VerfBlog. https://doi.org/10.17176/20200127-230141-0
Bárd, P. (2020b). The rule of law and academic freedom or the lack of it in Hungary. European Political Science, 19(1), 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-018-0171-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-018-0171-x
Benvenuti, S. (2020). SIDIBlog. Sulla Legge Organica Ungherese n. 12 Del 30 Marzo 2020 “Sulla Protezione Contro Il Coronavirus.” http://www.sidiblog.org/2020/04/07/sulla-legge-organica-ungherese-n-12-del-30-marzo-2020-sulla-protezione-contro-il-coronavirus/
Besselink, L., Tuori, K., Halmai, G., and Pinelli, C. (2019). The rule of law crisis in Europe. Diritto Pubblico, 18(1), 267–288. https://doi.org/10.1438/93726
Biernat, S., and Łętowska, E. (2021). This Was Not Just Another Ultra Vires Judgment! Commentary to the statement of retired judges of the Constitutional Tribunal. VerfBlog. https://doi.org/10.17176/20211027-182911-0
Casolari, F. (2020). La protezione dello Stato di diritto nell’Unione Europea ai tempi del coronavirus: se non ora, quando? SIDIBlog. http://www.sidiblog.org/2020/04/07/la-protezione-dello-stato-di-diritto-nellunione-europea-ai-tempi-del-coronavirus-se-non-ora-quando/
Coli, M. (2020). La legge ungherese sulla trasparenza associativa davanti alla Corte di giustizia: la tutela della rule of law che c’è ma non si vede? Quaderni Di SIDIBlog, 7(1), 513–530. http://www.sidiblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Quaderni-di-SIDIBlog-Volume-7-2020.pdf
Colombo, E. (2021). La Corte di giustizia condanna (nuovamente) l’Ungheria per l’inadeguatezza della normativa sull’asilo. Eurojus. http://rivista.eurojus.it/la-corte-di-giustizia-condanna-nuovamente-lungheria-per-linadeguatezza-della-normativa-sullasilo/
Federico, G. Di. (2021). Il Tribunale costituzionale polacco si pronuncia sul primato (della Costituzione polacca): et nunc quo vadis? BlogDUE. https://www.aisdue.eu/giacomo-di-federico-il-tribunale-costituzionale-polacco-si-pronuncia-sul-primato-della-costituzione-polacca-et-nunc-quo-vadis/
Gobbato, S. (2004). Golden share ed approccio uniforme in materia di capitali nella recente giurisprudenza comunitaria. Il Diritto Dell’Unione Europea, 2, 427–443.
Halmai, G. (2018). The Hungarian Constitutional Court betrays Academic Freedom and Freedom of Association. VerfBlog. https://doi.org/10.17176/20180611-095505-0
Hoxhaj, A. (2021). The CJEU in Commission v Hungary Higher Education Defends Academic Freedom Through WTO Provisions. The Modern Law Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12686 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12686
Hungary: NGO law a vicious and calculated assault on civil society. (2017). Amnesty International. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2017/06/hungary-ngo-law-a-vicious-and-calculated-assault-on-civil-society/.
Kochenov, D. V., and Dimitrovs, A. (2021). Solving the Copenhagen Dilemma: The Repubblika Decision of the European Court of Justice. VerfBlog. https://doi.org/10.17176/20210428-101313-0
Milani, G. (2019). Parlamento e parlamentarismo nella democrazia illiberale: l’esperienza ungherese. DPCE Online, 41(4), 2917–2934. http://www.dpceonline.it/index.php/dpceonline/article/view/840/848
Mori, P. (2018). L’uso della procedura d’infrazione a fronte di violazioni dei diritti fondamentali. Il Diritto Dell’Unione Europea, 2, 263–376.
Mori, P. (2020). La questione del rispetto dello Stato di diritto in Polonia e in Ungheria: recenti sviluppi. Federalismi.It, 8, 166–210.
Nagy, C. I. (2021a). Does WTO Law Protect Academic Freedom? It Depends on How You Use It. ASIL Insights, 25(1), 1–6.
Orlandi, M. A. (2019). La «democrazia illiberale». Ungheria e Polonia a confronto. Diritto Pubblico Comparato Ed Europeo, 5(1), 167–216. https://doi.org/10.17394/92979
Pace, L. F. (2021). La sentenza della Corte costituzionale polacca del 7 ottobre 2021: tra natura giuridica dell’Unione, l’illegittimità del sindacato ultra vires e l’attesa della soluzione della “crisi” tra Bruxelles e Berlino. BlogDUE. aisdue.eu/la-sentenza-della-corte-costituzionale-polacca-del-7-ottobre-2021-tra-natura-giuridica-dellunione-lillegittimita-del-sindacato-ultra-vires-e-lattesa-della-soluzione-della/
Prete, L. (2017). Infringement proceedings in EU law. Wolters Kluwer.
Prete, L., and Smulders, B. (2021). The Age Of Maturity Of Infringement Proceedings. Common Market Law Review, 58(2), 285 – 332.
Rossi, L. S. (2020). Il valore giuridico dei valori. L’Articolo 2 TUE: relazioni con altre disposizioni del diritto primario dell’UE e rimedi giurisdizionali. Federalismi.It, 19, iv–xxvi.
Safjan, M. (2019). The Rule of Law and the Future of Europe. Il Diritto Dell’Unione Europea, 3, 425–439.
Scheppele, K. L., and Pech, L. (2018). What is Rule of Law Backsliding? VerfBlog. https://doi.org/10.17176/20180302-181145
Sena, P. De. (2020). COVID-19, stato di diritto e Convenzione europea dei diritti umani: il caso ungherese. Quaderni Di SIDIBlog, 7(1), 191–202. http://www.sidiblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Quaderni-di-SIDIBlog-Volume-7-2020.pdf
Spadaro, I. (2021). La crisi dello Stato di dirittoin Ungheria, Polonia e Romania ed i possibili rimedi a livello europeo. Federalismi.It, 14, 178–203. https://www.federalismi.it/ApplOpenFilePDF.cfm?artid=45493&dpath=document&dfile=02062021111159.pdf&content=La%2Bcrisi%2Bdello%2BStato%2Bdi%2Bdiritto%2Bin%2BUngheria%2C%2BPolonia%2Be%2BRomania%2B-%2Bstato%2B-%2Bdottrina%2B-%2B
Várnay, E., and Varju, M. (2019). Whither Administrative Justice in Hungary? European Requirements and the Setting Up of a Separate Administrative Judiciary. European Public Law, 25(3), 283 – 304.
Vesperini, G. (2021). L’applicazione dell’Accordo GATS nell’ordinamento europeo: il caso delle norme ungheresi sulla istruzione superiore. Giornale Di Diritto Amministrativo, 27(1), 59–66.
Vranes, E. (2021). Enforcing WTO/GATS law and fundamental rights in EU infringement proceedings: An analysis of the ECJ’s ruling in Case C-66/18 Central European University. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 28(5), 699–713. https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X211024991 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1023263X211024991
Ziegler, T. D. (2019). It’s Not Just About CEU: Understanding the Systemic Limitation of Academic Freedom in Hungary. VerfBlog. https://doi.org/10.17176/20190517-144417-0
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2012).
Treaty on the European Union (2012).
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (2012).
Regulation on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget (2020).
Hungary, Act on the Amendment of Act CCIV of 2011 on National Tertiary Education (2017).
Hungary, Law on the Transparency of Organisations which receive Support from Abroad (2017).
Communication from the Commission, COM/2010/0573 final, Strategy for the effective implementation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights by the European Union (19 October 2010).
Parliamentary Assembly, resolution, 2162 (2017) (27 April 2017).
European Parliament, resolution, 2017/2656(RSP) (17 May 2017).
European Parliament, resolution, 2017/2131(INL) (12 September 2018).
European Parliament, resolution, 2020/2513(RSP) (16 January 2020).
Venice Commission, preliminary opinion, 891 / 2017 (11 August 2017).
Opinion of Advocate General Saugmandsgaard Øe of 29 November 2018, Commission v Hungary, C-235/17, ECLI:EU:C:2018:971.
Opinion of Advocate General Campos Sánchez-Bordona of 14 January 2020, Commission v Hungary, C 78/18, ECLI:EU:C:2020:1.
Opinion of Advocate General Kokott of 5 March 2020, Commission v Hungary, C 66/18, ECLI:EU:C:2020:172.
CJEU, judgement of 31 January 1984, Commission v Ireland, C-74/82, ECLI:EU:C:1984:34.
CJEU, judgement of 2 February 1988, Commission v Belgium, C-293/85, ECLI:EU:C:1988:40.
CJEU, judgement of 16 May 1991, Commission v the Netherlands, C-96/89, ECLI:EU:C:1991:213.
CJEU, judgement of 21 January 1999, Commission v Belgium, C-207/97, ECLI:EU:C:1999:17.
CJEU, judgement of 28 October 1999, Commission v Austria, C-328/96, ECLI:EU:C:1999:526.
CJEU, judgement of 13 December 2001, Commission v France, C-1/00, ECLI:EU:C:2001:687.
CJEU, judgement of 4 June 2002, Commission v Portugal, C-367/98, ECLI:EU:C:2002:326.
CJEU, judgement of 4 June 2002, Commission v France, C- 483/99, ECLI:EU:C:2002:327.
CJEU, judgement of 13 May 2003, Commission v Spain, C-463/00, ECLI:EU:C:2003:272.
CJEU, judgement of 12 May 2005, Commission v Belgium, C-287/03, ECLI:EU:C:2005:282.
CJEU, judgement of 15 November 2005, Commission v Austria, C-320/03, ECLI:EU:C:2005:684.
CJEU, judgement of 8 December 2005, Commission v Luxembourg, C-33/04, ECLI:EU:C:2005:750.
CJEU, judgement of 30 November 2006, Commission v Italy, C-293/05, ECLI:EU:C:2006:750.
CJEU, judgement of 24 April 2007, Commission v the Netherlands, C-523/04, ECLI:EU:C:2007:244.
CJEU, judgement of 18 July 2007, Commission v Germany, C-490/04, ECLI:EU:C:2007:430.
CJEU, judgement of 12 February 2009, Block, C-67/08, ECLI:EU:C:2009:92.
CJEU, judgement of 21 January 2010, Commission v Germany, C-546/07, ECLI:EU:C:2010:25.
CJEU, judgement of 6 November 2012, Commission v. Hungary, C-286/12, ECLI:EU:C:2012:687.
CJEU, judgement of 17 October 2013, Welte, C-181/12, ECLI:EU:C:2013:662.
CJEU, judgement of 4 May 2017, Commission v Greece, C-98/16, ECLI:EU:C:2017:346.
CJEU, judgement of 27 February 2018, Associação Sindical dos Juízes Portuguese, C-64/16, ECLI:EU:C:2018:117.
CJEU, judgement of 16 March 2018, Segro, C-52/16 and C-113/16, ECLI:EU:C:2018:157.
CJEU, judgement of 20 September 2018, EV v Finanzamt Lippstadt, C-685/16, ECLI:EU:C:2018:743.
CJEU, judgement of 21 May 2019, Commission v Hungary, C-235/17, ECLI:EU:C:2019:432.
CJEU, judgement of 24 June 2019, Commission v. Poland, C-619/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:531.
CJEU, judgement of 19 November 2019, A.K. v. Krajowa Rada Sądownictwa and CP, DO v. Sąd Najwyższy, joint cases C‑585/18, C‑624/18, C‑625/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:982.
CJEU, judgement of 2 April 2020, Commission v Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic, joint cases C-715/17, C-718/17, C-719/17, ECLI:EU:C:2020:257.
CJEU, judgement of 18 June 2020, Commission v Hungary, C-78/18, ECLI:EU:C:2020:476.
CJEU, judgement of 6 October 2020, Commission v Hungary, C-66/18, ECLI:EU:C:2020:792.
CJEU, judgement of 17 December 2020, Commission v. Hungary, C-808/18, ECLI:EU:C:2020:1029.
CJEU, judgement of 2 March 2021, A.B, C.D., E.F, G.H, I.J. v. Krajowa Rada Sądownictwa, C-824/18, ECLI:EU:C:2021:153).
CJEU, judgement of 20 April 2021, Repubblika, C‑896/19, ECLI:EU:C:2021:311.
Poland, Constitutional Court, K 3/21 (7 October 2021).
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2021 Bratislava Law Review
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The Author(s) transfers copyright to the Article to the Publisher of the Journal by the Licence Agreement.
The Author(s) retains rights specified in the Licence Agreement.
The readers may read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of all of the Article of the Journal and use them for any other lawful purpose under specified Creative Commons Licence (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).