The European Parliament’s Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Committee has adopted a second interim report on Hungary under Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union, increasing pressure on member states and the European Commission over rule-of-law concerns.
The vote took place on 5 November and follows the Parliament’s 2018 move to trigger Article 7 in response to alleged systemic breaches of the Union’s values. The dossier proceeds to the Strasbourg part-session of 24–27 November; the draft agenda lists the Hungary item for debate on Wednesday, 26 November.
The committee text urges the Council to move beyond hearings and adopt concrete measures, including advancing to Article 7(2) and, if warranted, suspending certain rights such as voting rights in the Council. It also calls on the Commission to make full use of legal tools, including expedited infringement proceedings relying directly on Article 2 TEU, applications for interim measures before the Court of Justice, and actions for non-implementation of Court judgments.
MEPs state that the situation in Hungary “continues to deteriorate” and that the absence of decisive action by the Council and Commission has contributed to backsliding. The interim report repeats concerns covering judicial independence, the Uniformity Chamber of the Kúria, corruption risks, and media market distortions. It recalls Parliament’s earlier finding, adopted in 2022, that Hungary has become a “hybrid regime of electoral autocracy”.
A recent opinion by Advocate General Tamara Ćapeta is cited in support of deploying Article 2 TEU in litigation. In June 2025 she advised that infringement actions may be brought where the “negation” of an EU value is the root cause of other breaches of EU law. If the Court of Justice confirms that approach, the committee urges the Commission to bring targeted cases predicated on Article 2 alongside sector-specific proceedings.
The report links Article 7 to budgetary safeguards. It states that EU funds should remain frozen until relevant judgments of the Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights are implemented and the effectiveness of adopted reforms is demonstrated. It points to obstacles facing Hungary’s Integrity Authority and to concerns over the distribution of state advertising, while urging the Commission to ensure final beneficiaries can be reached via local authorities and NGOs where necessary.
Member states have repeatedly examined Hungary under Article 7 since 2018. The most recent Council hearing was held on 27 May 2025, but no recommendations or determination under Article 7(1) were adopted. The committee argues that further delay would itself undermine the rule-of-law principle and calls for at least one hearing per Council presidency, publication of comprehensive minutes after each session, and the issuance of concrete recommendations with deadlines.
Article 7 provides a two-stage response to threats to EU values: a finding of a “clear risk” under Article 7(1) and, at a later stage, a determination of a “serious and persistent breach” under Article 7(2), which can lead to suspension of certain Treaty rights, including voting rights in the Council. The separate procedure against Poland was closed in May 2024, leaving Hungary as the only member state currently subject to Article 7 scrutiny.
Next steps move to the plenary. MEPs are due to debate the interim report during the 24–27 November sitting in Strasbourg and are expected to table a resolution reflecting the committee’s recommendations. Any decision to escalate Article 7 or to impose sanctions rests with the Council, acting by the required majorities at each stage, while infringement actions are for the Commission to bring and the Court of Justice to adjudicate.
The committee frames the text as the first comprehensive stocktake of the new legislature. It states that issues identified in earlier resolutions have persisted or worsened, and it highlights new developments that, in its view, warrant a broader response. It also urges close monitoring of Hungary’s 2026 elections to ensure compliance with standards on free and fair competition, media access and safeguards for civil society. Whether the Council now shifts from discussion to decision will be a test of the Union’s capacity to enforce its values through the mechanisms provided in the Treaties.
