The judicial way is the most effective method against states that do not respect the principles of the European Union

the European Union is finally moving to sanction those states that deviate from the fundamental principles, which they themselves subscribed at the time of accession, of the common European home. This is a belated measure, carried out after years of provocations towards Brussels and all those countries that have made respect for the fundamental principles of the Union their distinctive feature within the supranational organization; however, it is also a beginning with a meaning that goes beyond the single sentence and serves as a warning and warning for other nations, which only intend to enjoy the advantages, especially economic ones, of belonging to the European Union. The Brussels strategy was that of the judicial route, despite the presence of the famous article 7 of the Union Treaty, which allows the suspension of the right to vote in the European institutions of the country that violates the fundamental values ​​of the EU included in article 2 of the Treaty. Against the application of this sanction, however, Hungary and Poland can count on the alliance of different states, which share with the two countries the economic interests deriving from belonging to the Union. For Brussels, therefore, the judicial route was an obligatory solution but which proved to be effective. Specifically, the action of the European Court of Justice was implemented against the Hungarian legislative measure which provided for the closure of a university with an ad hoc law. This was considered incompatible with Community law; the law of the government of Budapest was built specifically to ban the activity and expel the Central European University, present in Hungary since 1991, from the state territory. This university was established by the billionaire George Soros, of Hungarian origin and opposed by the parties and sovereign movements. The Court’s verdict accepted the European Commission’s appeal against the Hungarian law for violations of European rules on the freedom of institutions, failure to comply with the articles of the Charter of Fundamental Rights which enshrine the freedom to establish educational centers and the relative freedom of teaching and finally also the violation of the rules of the World Trade Organization on the free provision of services. The Court’s decision will allow the European Commission to formally request the Hungarian country to repeal or amend the disputed law, while eliminating the articles that led to the closure of the university; in the event that the government of Budapest does not follow the provisions of the Court, the Commission may present a new complaint with the aim of proposing heavy financial sanctions against Hungary. This case has an important significance for the European Commission because, specifically, it marks a method, which seems to be effective, against those countries that have undertaken the non-respect of rights as a method of government; moreover, the provisions of the Court had already stopped the judicial reform envisaged in Poland, which endangered the independence of the judiciary. If the judicial path has practical effects, it remains, however, bound to a legal procedure, which may have uncertain effects, i.e. for the moment it represents the best tool available, but it cannot completely replace an adequate political process, capable of regulating in a definitive and automatic way the non-respect of fundamental rights by authoritarian governments. Unfortunately, the Union is still conditioned by the need for the unanimity of the states: a system that conditions and blocks the decisions of the European parliament and slows down the action of the Commission, often called upon to make decisions that the contingency of times would require very fast. This approach should be overcome, also with a view to greater European integration, certainly paying for the loss of a share of the sovereignty of individual states; but, in the end, the crucial point is precisely that of the sovereignty of individual nations, an issue which, if not overcome, could block any progress towards greater integration. It appears the task of the European Parliament to proceed towards a reform that can release decisions and also sanctions in a majority manner in order to overcome the current logic that provides for the unanimity requirement, trusting that the majority of states will always be faithful to the constitutive principles of ‘European Union.