A PLACE IN THE EU

The relationship between Hungary and the EU is overshadowed by another scandal. European Com-mission President Jean-Claude Juncker threatened to expel Budapest from the EU, because the prime minister of this country, Viktor Orban, hinted at the possible introduction of the death penalty. The death penalty was abolished in Hungary a quarter of a century ago and now the head of government believes that the country's current law is too soft towards dangerous criminals. Orban came to this conclusion came after the news of the brutal murder of a young woman during a shop robbery.

Brussels was horrified by the words of Orban. "Anyone who introduces the death penalty has no place in the European Union. If Hungary decides on such a step, it will be 'grounds for its divorce' with the EU," said the head of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker. Hungary was also warned by the official representative of the German government and European Parliament President Martin Schulz, while the European Parliament also expressed its opinion at a meeting of the committee on civil rights. "Hungary has crossed the line," members of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats stressed. They even called for the exclusion of Orban's right-wing party Fidesz from the ranks of the influential European People's Party.

Orban described such remarks as an infringement on freedom of speech. "Where do we live? In the Middle Ages? We are told that there is a taboo on discussing certain topics! Not everything is set in stone. These rules are created by people, and people can also change them. This is the meaning of freedom, the meaning of democracy," the outraged premier said in an interview with Echo TV. The head of the Hungarian cabinet stressed that although he does not call for a return to the death penalty, but only raises the possibility of public debate on this issue, each country itself must decide whether to introduce the death penalty or not. In response, the First Vice-President of the European Commission Frans Timmermans pointed out that freedom of speech should be limited to the rule of law. Timmermans also recalled the position that Budapest has been taking on the very topical issue of refugees - Hungary called for it to be looked at through the prism of the terrorist threat and for a "nationwide referendum" to be held on it. Budapest was reminded of all its sins, which, according to Brussels, have accumulated in the recent period. Earlier, in 2010 Budapest drew a fire of criticism in connection with the adoption of the media law that restricted freedom of expression, and in 2012 Budapest was criticized for extensive amendments to the constitution, which, according to many, violated freedom of the press in general and infringed the civil liberties in the country. In particular, the privileged status of the titular nation, which automatically means discrimination against national minorities, caused special discontent. Hungary is criticized for failing to restrain the growing popularity of the far-right Jobbik party, whose members do not hide their extreme nationalist sentiment and especially dislike the Gypsies. By the way, the prime minister's recent statement on the death penalty is believed to be linked with his desire to take some popularity points from Jobbik. Thus, Orban acts as a kind of "enfant terrible" (difficult teenager) in the EU, and the English-language press often refers to his name and position as "controversial". At the recent Eastern Partnership summit in Riga, the same Juncker called the prime minister of Hungary a "dictator" during greetings and gave him a comic slap in the face. All this can, of course, be attributed to the oddities of Juncker, who patted Donald Tusk on the cheek on the same day and kissed another politician on the forehead in a fatherly manner, but nevertheless Hungary, like it or not, is often the subject of criticism over non-compliance as a decent member of the EU.

If the example of Hungary is so negative, then what is a perfect member of the European Union like? For accession to the EU (and presumably, for further status as a member of it), a country must meet a number of criteria (Copenhagen criteria). Among them is the stability of institutions that guarantee respect for democratic principles, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, the recognition of the EU legal system, compliance with the objectives of the political, economic and monetary union, the principles of a common foreign and defence policy, and so on. With the entry of the Lisbon Treaty (1 December 2009) into force, the implementation of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, which is often regarded as one of the key documents and is accepted in the EU as the standard in compliance with the rule of law and human rights, became mandatory for EU institutions and member states. In addition, it is considered that the above strict criteria sometimes become an insurmountable barrier for countries wishing to join the EU. Negotiations to join the ranks of united Europe have been conducted for many years with Turkey, Macedonia, Serbia, etc., but so far they have not been able to rise to the height of the EU. However, the sharp warning to Hungary raises questions as to how much the full members of the EU meet the standards they themselves established?

The deteriorating situation in the field of human rights, the most serious in the last two decades, was spoken about openly enough in last year's report of the Council of Europe. EU countries are known for such human rights violations as xenophobia, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, problems in ensuring the rights of immigrants and asylum seekers, corruption, violation of the rights of national minorities, police brutality, problems in prison conditions and in ensuring freedom of speech and so on.

For example, Hungary, which was also accused of abusing the rights of minorities, is not alone in the EU area. One of the most discriminated groups in the EU is the Gypsies, especially those who live in France, Germany, Poland and the Czech Republic. In these countries, there is virtually no strategy for their social integration, Gypsy settlements are often destroyed by force, and the practice of segregation of Gypsy children is frequent in schools. There have been cases of police brutality and violations of the rights of immigrants from Muslim and African countries. In Latvia and Estonia, there is a special category of "non-citizens" - stateless persons who are also deprived of the right to vote, and their passports are only a travel document. Prisoners in the UK have no voting rights, for example. EU policy on immigrants lags behind many norms of international law. In this case, Brussels is acting in accordance with its own interests and in the spirit of Realpolitik. Some EU countries - especially France, Germany, Sweden, Italy and Hungary - are the most affected by the influx of immigrants from devastated and war-torn countries of the Middle East and Maghreb. The European Commission is trying to find a way out through a fair distribution of efforts between all EU countries, in fact, we are talking about quotas. However, Latvia, Estonia and Finland made it clear that they are not eager to receive refugees. "We in Finland believe that every member state should have the right to decide about its own affairs," Finish Foreign Minister Timo Soini said. It can be said that the attitude towards immigrants, especially illegal ones, does not violate the rights of EU citizens. But in this situation, the commitment to the spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Europe's declared high standards of human rights and in particular, the principle of universality regardless of gender, ethnicity and religious affiliation, etc. are affected.

In addition, European countries can be accused of violating the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Austerity measures to overcome the economic and financial crisis undermine social and economic rights, which include the right to decent work and decent living conditions. EC Vice-President in charge of Energy Union Maros Sefcovic once said that about 10 per cent of the EU population cannot pay their electricity bills, and there is even a new term - energy poverty. In turn, dissatisfaction with the influx of immigrants and the declining living standards cause problems such as racial intolerance and xenophobia in Europe - this is familiar to almost all EU countries, including France, Britain, Germany and Spain. This is proved by the growing popularity of far-right parties. For example, elections to the Danish parliament should take place on 18 June. According to forecasts, the far-right Danish People's Party, which advocates exit from the EU, might get 20 per cent of the vote to become the third largest political organization of the kingdom. The party is also one of the most powerful anti-immigrant parties in Europe.

Among other not just Hungarian, but also pan-European sins of Europe is often the violation of the right to privacy and confidentiality and unanswered questions about secret CIA prisons on the territory of EU member states.

Most recently, one of the key EU countries - Britain - tried to take the initiative to replace the Human Rights Act with a British Bill of Rights, which would seriously limit the influence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in the country. Supporters of the change believe that the bill of rights will be more consistent with "British values". Royal lawyer Jonathan Fischer said that if Britain does not quit the European Convention on Human Rights, the country "will give away an element of sovereignty" to the judges in Strasbourg. Is Brussels threatening to London with the same penalties as Budapest? No, and Juncker does not give Cameron comic slaps in the face. But perhaps the thing is that these threats are not so terrible for London, as Prime Minister David Cameron promised in late 2017 to hold a referendum in the UK on whether it should remain in the EU. At the same time, it is clear that Hungary will not impose the death penalty and risk its membership in the European club, just like Juncker has no authority to threaten Budapest. This is a "debate" within the EU. The external message of these altercations is quite clear - the problem of human rights exists around the world and there are no absolutely white areas, unfortunately, even in Europe, which is represented, of course, not only by Hungary.