Debate: Determination of a clear risk of a serious breach by the Republic of Poland of the rule of law - LGBTI-free zones in Poland within the scope of the Rete Lenford case
Date: MONDAY, 14 SEPTEMBER 2020
Speaker: Věra Jourová
Language: EN

Let me start with with a recollection of how we felt about the rule of law and values some years ago, maybe 10 years ago. We used to speak about the independent judges and about the freedom of speech and a vibrant civil society, free and fair elections. It was with a very relaxed voice, as if we had created some kind of perpetuum mobile for values in the EU. Now we see that we have to deploy all possible powers and measures to renew the importance of the values like rule of law, fundamental rights and democracy to the European Union, because these are the values the EU was thus founded on.  And speaking about measures, I indeed described what we do in the field of infringement procedures. We can only use them when there is a clear violation of EU law. It might sound legalistic. It is. It is a legal approach, as Ms Delbos-Corfield mentioned, but we, the Commission, are not activists.  We can only start infringement procedures when we have a very solid legal ground, and believe me, I want to win the cases. We cannot afford to lose the cases which relate to rule of law issues. It’s too important, and we need also to work on the credibility of the EU, and losing the cases would not be a good thing. That’s why I wanted to attract your attention also to the previous cases where they were all successful. And important cases relating to rule of law. Article 7: we obviously see that there was a lack of imagination in those who created the Lisbon Treaty, who foresaw the Article 7 as a functional measure. We see now that it’s toothless. We have lengthy procedures, we have the debate about Hungary and Poland, and it’s not only Hungary supporting Poland and vice versa. There are other Member States who are supporting States where we see obvious breach of the basic principle of the rule of law.  So we have to deploy further measures. Obviously, we have to accelerate more and more powers and to be also innovative in how to support the rule of law in the Member States. That’s why we proposed the rule of law conditionality, the linkage between the rule of law principle and the budget.  You know that there was a very difficult debate on the night of 21 June when the Council was adopting the new budget, and the talks will continue. I do believe that we need such an instrument. I sometimes say in a rather cynical way that whoever doesn’t understand the values usually understands the money. Let’s use this instrument. We need it. And also because the taxpayers of many Member States are fed up with funding projects in the countries where fundamental rights are violated. And here I come also to the issue of the breach of the rights of the LGBTI people. Where we are now with the budget is a very dangerous situation. The bigger the money, the lower the trust. I think that this is devastating. We need to promote the idea of linking the EU taxpayers’ money with the basic principles of the EU.  The second measure which we want to use is also a response to the criticism which I heard from this side of Parliament that that is double or triple standards, different treatments, that we are only focusing on Poland and Hungary. It was never my goal. I always wanted to make a very objective and fair comparison of the situation of the rule of law in the Member States and it cannot be done by comparing two laws or two articles in two different laws in Germany and Poland or in Hungary and Spain. We have to look at the broader picture in all the Member States. That’s why we are now finishing the work on the rule of law report where we will focus not only on the situation of the judiciary but also on media and on the anti-corruption fight, because we believe that these are interconnected features and factors and we should be able to make an objective assessment.  The way of assessing is very transparent. Also the authorities in Poland and all the other Member States had a possibility to comment on the findings and we will soon make the reports public and make further comments. Indeed, it was also said here, we need a better definition of what we mean by the rule of law. We will do that. We will always make better and better explanations because we also simply have to explain on a continuous basis to the citizens of the EU why we need the rule of law principle in place, why we need an independent judge. There is a lack of awareness of how important the principle is for every single citizen.  So I believe that these two new instruments will help to increase our ability. Now it will be a quote in many of your speeches to do ‘something;. We need to do something more.  My objective is also – and it is the reaction of Sophia in ‘t Veld – that there has been enough dialogue. My objective is to continue the dialogue because Poland is an EU Member State, and I really want to invite Poland back to Europe where we esteem and respect values. Sorry I am long. On the LGBTI issue, I am in permanent contact with the Polish Ombudsman. We have strengthened the competences of equality bodies which are available for LGBTI people. We need to be clearer that the financial resources of the EU will not be paid in case there is such a violation of the fundamental rights of people. And it was a good thing that we stopped the funding of the six projects because there was no clarification of what’s happening there.  I was happy to see also the peer pressure of other municipalities which didn’t want to cooperate, because what we see in some of the municipalities is a big worry that the LGBTI people are under big threat. Moreover, when we hear the aggressive rhetoric against LGBTI people from the political circles, it is a kind of authorisation to do the same thing for the whole society. I find this intolerable. The Commission will continue working on this issue. You said that you don’t want to hear anything about monitoring and analysing. Well we are now analysing how to react to the declarations elaborated by the municipalities because the legal issue is that they are not laws or sub-laws which could be addressed by the infringement procedure, but we are trying to find a way. And from this place I would like to send a lot of encouragement to LGBTI people because Europe is standing behind them.