|
|
|
|
|
by petre
1630 days ago
|
|
I don't know about the woulds or would nots, I'm not an expert in constitutional law or international treaties. The former head of the CC is the former. I listen to what he has to say. It is what it is. What I can tell you is that the current situation suits me because there are mechanisms in place that make it considerably harder for local politicians to tighten their grip on power and turn my country into a dictatorship again. I will never support eurosceptic parties precisely because of what happened in Poland and Hungary, among other issues like Holocaust denial. |
|
If there is no treaty validating ECJ Supremacy, then that's it. Even a 'statement' or 'interpretation' by an Judge or Expert will be called into question.
Also - you may despair in the short run for the authoritative nature of 'Hungary' but there is a much bigger issue and that is the consolidation of power at the EU level.
Hungary has elections for it's leaders.
The EU does not.
You did not vote for Ursula Von Der Leyen. She was not a candidate, and was totally unknown outside Germany before the election. She was not vetted. She had little public history. Voters did not select her.
She was chosen in a backroom deal: "Here is your new President. We selected her for you. You will find about her platform, later, we hope you like it because obviously you didn't vote for it". Ursula von der Layen layed out her vision for EU long after voters even knew who she was.
The EU Treaties only in 2007 even require the selection of the Pres. to even barely take into consideration the 'recommendation' of MEPs, even then, they have no power. MEPs cannot introduce legislation or sanction leaders.
The EU is the least democratic 'layer' of European governance, combined with the fact that it is at the 'top' and sometimes has the most authority, is a pretty scary thing in terms of the balance of power.
So the EU is 'good for dealing with PiS' yes, probably. But there are other, broader issue.