quinta-feira, 12 de fevereiro de 2026
‘Absurd!’ Orbán slams idea of returning EU’s €10B
.jpeg)
‘Absurd!’
Orbán slams idea of returning EU’s €10B
European
Commission was wrong to give Hungary EU funds, says adviser to top court.
February
12, 2026 10:47 am CET
By Max
Griera and Gabriel Gavin
ALDEN
BIESEN, Belgium — Viktor Orbán said it
would be “absurd” if judges demanded the EU claw back €10 billion in funds
given to Hungary.
The
Hungarian prime minister was responding to a question from POLITICO about what
he would do if the Commission tried to get back the money, as was advised by a
senior legal adviser to Europe’s top court earlier Thursday. Orbán spoke as he
left an EU leaders’ retreat in the Belgian countryside.
The Court
of Justice of the EU is examining a claim by the European Parliament that the
Commission breached its own rules when it unfroze funding for Hungary in
December 2023 — money that had been withheld over rule-of-law concerns.
MEPs
accuse the Commission of political expediency, arguing that the decision came
on the eve of a crucial summit of EU leaders at which the bloc was desperate
for Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán to cooperate on sending aid to
Ukraine.
The legal
opinion by Advocate-General Tamara Ćapeta — to annul the Commission’s decision
to unfreeze the funds — will guide the judges on their final ruling, which will
be delivered in a few months. Advocates-general are not judges but legal
advisers who help the court in complicated or unprecedented cases.
The
opinion lands at a sensitive time, with Orbán trailing in the polls ahead of an
April election in Hungary. EU leaders have for several months steadfastly
avoided cracking down on Budapest or saying anything overly critical about the
prime minister, with the understanding in the Commission and among diplomats
that any pressure on Orbán would be spun into campaign material. The legal
opinion is “not what we needed” this close to the ballot, said an EU diplomat,
granted anonymity to speak freely.
In a
statement to POLITICO, a spokesperson for the Commission said: “We consider
that the Commission decision at issue was based on a thorough assessment, in
particular of the reforms undertaken by Hungary to remedy the shortcomings of
the judicial system that the Commission had identified. Furthermore, the
Commission decision clearly stated the reasons why the Commission considered
that those reforms remedied those shortcomings.”
Orbán did
not comment on the ruling as he arrived for a summit of EU leaders in the
Belgian countryside. His political director, Bálazs Orbán, said the opinion
stemmed from Hungary’s opposition to Ukraine joining the EU. “The moment a
member state steps off the European elite script, the legal machinery whirs
into action,” he said.
The Court
has been working on the case since March 2024 when Parliament filed the suit.
In-depth
assessment
Ćapeta’s
opinion says the Commission “incorrectly” applied its own rule-of-law
requirements when it handed over the funds before the Hungarian government’s
reforms had been fully applied.
She also
said the Commission failed to conduct “a proper assessment of the reforms
relating to the independence” of the Hungarian Supreme Court and the
appointment of members to the Hungarian Constitutional Court — two key issues
that the Parliament said the Commission had not properly addressed.
The
advocate-general also slammed the Commission for a lack of transparency, saying
it failed to provide proper arguments for the decision to unfreeze the funds.
“The Commission owes an explanation not only to Hungary, but to the EU citizens
at large,” reads a statement from the court.
However,
the advocate-general did not back the Parliament’s allegations that the
Commission abused its powers.
Ćapeta
argued that, in the Commission’s assessment to unfreeze the funds, it failed to
take into account the controversial Sovereignty Protection Law in the Hungarian
parliament. In a separate legal opinion issued on Thursday, the Court found
that the law breaches EU law, as it hampers “several fundamental freedoms,”
according to a statement.
Get the
money back
René
Repasi, a German MEP and EU law professor at Erasmus University Rotterdam and
the University of Geneva, said an annulment would mean the Commission should
“request the money back.”
“If
Hungary does not pay back, the Commission can lower other disbursements, which
Hungary is entitled to receive, by the amount Hungary is obliged to pay back,”
Repasi said.
When it
comes, the court’s ruling will establish a precedent regarding the extent of
the Commission’s discretion when assessing rule-of-law violations by EU
countries, especially in the context of the Common Provisions Regulation, which
sets strict conditions relating to fundamental rights and judicial independence
for the disbursement of EU funds.
The
Commission defended itself during a hearing in October 2025, saying that
specific pre-established technical “milestones” on addressing judicial
independence concerns had been formally met by Budapest, and therefore, the
Commission had to release the funds.
But the
advocate-general’s opinion sides with the Parliament’s lawyers’ argument that
the Commission should have taken a broader view of systemic rule-of-law
deficiencies in Hungary and that it incorrectly assessed the fulfillment of
judicial reform targets.
Green MEP
Daniel Freund said the advocate-general’s opinion “was a stinging rebuke to the
Commission. Should the court follow this reasoning in its final ruling, it
would mark a victory for the rule of law in Europe.”
He added
that the opinion “confirms what the European Parliament has long denounced: The
release of €10 billion to the Hungarian government was illegal and politically
motivated. By acting as it did, the Commission has gambled away its own
credibility.”
“EU funds
must only be disbursed when the recipient upholds the law, European values, and
the rule of law. We expect the European Commission to adhere to these
principles in the future. It must stop allowing itself to be manipulated by
autocrats like Viktor Orbán,” Freund said.
This
story has been updated. Zoya Sheftalovich contributed reporting.
