The EU Must Defend its Rule-of-Law Revolution

There is no other explanation as to why the Visegrad Four countries of Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic and Slovakia joined with Italy to pave the way for a German federalist to become president of the European Commission despite their past calls for an end to Germany's domination. All five nations are governed by anti-liberal, populist or far-right parties.

Also, the Central and Eastern European governments gave up on actively pushing for an Eastern European candidate for one of the top positions — although they have always rightly argued that a regional balance would be a must.

Both goals were sacrificed for the sake of a single overarching priority: to prevent the nomination of Frans Timmermans, who is synonymous with the EU's new determination to fight rule-of-law violations.

The triumphalism of the populists may be premature as Timmermans is likely to remain vice-president of the Commission. But how EU institutions address internal rule of law problems of member states has become a key battleground over the future of the EU. 

EU 'toothless' no more

The concerns of the populist governments are not unfounded. In the last 12 months, the EU experienced a veritable rule of law revolution which contradicts the enduring narrative that the EU is toothless when its member states systematically violate its fundamental values and principles (including rule of law). 

Just a few days before the decisions were taken about the future EU leadership, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued a landmark verdict. 

On June 24, it ruled that Poland's "Law on the Supreme Court", which lowered the retirement age of judges on the Supreme Court, was contrary to EU law and breached the principle that the judges cannot be removed and...

Continue reading on: