MEPs warn of continued democratic backsliding in Bulgaria and Hungary and demand swifter EU action
Members of the European Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs (AFET) have expressed renewed concern about democratic erosion in Bulgaria and Hungary and urged both filing of reforms and a stronger response from EU institutions, the committee said in a press release on Thursday.
In a statement accompanying the committee’s findings, MEPs said democratic backsliding in the two member states has persisted and stressed the need for concrete corrective measures. The press release did not set out legislative proposals or timelines, but called on national authorities to adopt reforms and on EU bodies to intensify engagement and oversight.
Why this matters for the EU
Democratic standards and the rule of law are central to the European Union’s political identity and legal framework. When member states show signs of democratic weakening, it raises questions about the enforcement of common values and the functioning of shared institutions. The AFET committee’s intervention underscores Brussels’ continued vigilance over internal democratic standards and signals that the Parliament intends to keep pressure on national governments to comply with EU norms.
European businesses, citizens and institutions can be affected when the rule of law and independent institutions are perceived to be under threat. Investors often seek legal certainty and predictable governance; continued concerns about democratic backsliding can have reputational and economic consequences. Politically, persistent rule-of-law concerns complicate the EU’s internal cohesion and its credibility when promoting democracy and human rights abroad.
What the committee said
The AFET press release states that members of the committee “warn of continued democratic backsliding in both countries and call for reforms and a stronger EU response.” It highlights two linked elements: recommendations to national authorities in Bulgaria and Hungary to pursue reforms, and a call on EU institutions to step up their oversight and response.
The release does not provide details on the specific areas where backsliding is alleged, nor does it list particular reforms that MEPs want in either country. Similarly, the statement does not outline how the EU should escalate its response — for example, whether it should use existing conditionality mechanisms, initiate Article 7 procedures, withhold funds, or employ other tools available at both the Commission and Parliament level.
Context and background
The European Parliament has in recent years repeatedly scrutinised member states over the rule of law, judicial independence and media freedom. Hungary has been a focal point of such scrutiny, while Bulgaria has also faced criticism in the past over governance and rule-of-law issues. The AFET committee’s latest pronouncement is the most recent parliamentary-level expression of concern and follows broader institutional debates in Brussels about how to respond to perceived democratic deterioration among member states.
The EU has a range of instruments to address rule-of-law concerns, including the Commission’s rule-of-law reports, infringement procedures, budgetary conditionality linking EU funds to respect for the rule of law, and, in extreme cases, Article 7 TEU, which can lead to the suspension of certain rights of a member state. The press release does not indicate which of these mechanisms MEPs consider most appropriate in the current situation.
Next steps and implications
The AFET committee’s statement signals ongoing parliamentary attention and could presage further debates, resolutions or proposals in the European Parliament. MEPs calling for a “stronger EU response” may push for clarifying which instruments should be used and for more concrete follow-up actions by the Commission and Council.
For national governments in Sofia and Budapest, the renewed call for reforms places democratic governance once again at the centre of EU scrutiny. Any escalation by EU institutions could have political implications domestically and could affect relations with Brussels, depending on how both member states respond.
For EU institutions, continued monitoring and possible intervention will be a test of the Union’s capacity to reconcile national sovereignty with enforcement of shared values. The committee’s appeal underscores that the Parliament will remain an active voice in those discussions.
What the press release did not say
The AFET brief did not include precise allegations, names, dates, or an explicit roadmap for action, and it did not reference any new findings beyond the general warning of continued backsliding. The absence of detailed measures or a timetable leaves open how the Parliament and other EU bodies will translate this warning into concrete policy steps.
European policymakers and observers will be watching for subsequent parliamentary debates, potential non-legislative resolutions, or initiatives from the European Commission that could clarify the next phase of scrutiny or intervention.
Source: Full Press Release
