It comes as a logical move that you will lead the Fidesz list in next year's EP elections, as you have been the face of the fight against Brussels. What role will you play in the campaign?
"It's no secret that I have been a state official working with commitment towards Hungarian interests all along, but this campaign will require far more preparation than earlier ones. The stakes are very high for the 2024 EP elections: a conservative turn in the European institutions is needed, and I want to take an active role in this. But this task, like my ministerial duties, requires a whole person, which is why I have already informed the prime minister of my intention to resign as of 31 July. I believe that the right thing to do is to hand over the leadership of the justice ministry to someone who can concentrate one hundred per cent on the job.
These four years were a great honour for me, and it was an uplifting feeling to represent Hungary's interests.
That's what I'm going to do in the future too, but now in the focus of a campaign. I cannot confirm the information, as it is up to the board of Fidesz to decide on the list. It is true, however, that I envision my future in the European Parliament.
You recently said that there is a lack of trust between the European Union and Hungary. Do you want to remedy this lack of trust or continue to fight, if necessary, in another place, with different means?
It is correct to talk about a lack of trust, but I think its direction is different from how it is presented in the leftist-liberal media:
Hungary's trust in EU institutions has been seriously damaged recently.
Although we have striven for cooperation and sensible compromises, they have repeatedly failed to deliver on their promises, even at the highest levels. It is my unconcealed goal to build many more alliances in our European network, and to do so we have to deal with European politics as a general rule. We can see a conservative movement unfolding across Europe. We should build on this. I have always said that it does not matter who belongs to which party group, the point is to offset the disproportionate leftist-liberal predominance prevailing in the EU.
Common sense must return that puts the interests of European citizens first whether the issue is migration, gender or war and peace. I'm driven by this objective, obviously in such a way that Hungary's position gains ground in these issues.
I believe that all the tasks that I took on when I was appointed have been completed. Recently, we managed to conclude two major agreements in Brussels: in December, we made a big step forward in the conditionality procedure, and in May, we were able to conclude the justice package, with only implementation remaining. Just yesterday, we announced the so-called trio presidency programme with our Spanish and Belgian counterparts in Luxembourg and Hungary has set up a whole governance structure in recent months to successfully conduct our rotating presidency of the EU in the second half of 2024. In the classical fields of justice, I am particularly proud that the national network of victim support has been almost completely developed. My successor just has to cut through the missing inaugural ribbons. In the field of family law, we have done a lot to strengthen the rights of children and families in cooperation with civil society and law enforcers. And just after I was first appointed, we implemented a historic salary increase for judges and prosecutors. I had the opportunity to work in a fantastic ministry with fantastic colleagues, and I am very grateful to them for everything. I feel that I can do much more in the future if my commitment to the interests of the Hungarian people continues to play a key role in European politics. In the perspective of Europe's future, the campaign is now the priority: to make the European Right, the conservatives, believe that they are capable of winning this election. And this work requires a complete person.
You talked about the hope of a conservative turn, but is there any chance of that happening in Europe?
There are some encouraging signs. The political parties that once pursued classic conservative politics, but shifted in the liberal direction in Western Europe no longer offer answers to the problems European people face. Leftist, progressive liberal, and the green parties have disappointed many people. And if we think of the successes achieved by Vox in Spain or Fratelli in Italy, we must see that the stigmas attached to political parties do not work: voters cast their votes on the basis of their own perception of reality. More and more citizens want to return to the core values that these parties represent. I believe in people, and we have some experience to share with them in Hungary and also in Europe. The Hungarian method is based on consultation and direct contact with voters.
It's worth asking people's opinion, it's worth putting honest and simple slogans on our banners, such as no migration, no gender, no war,
as Hungary's prime minister put it at the CPAC. I believe that embracing this vision in as many places as possible could be the key to success. Of course, I read the polls that say this change is not happening. But considering that Europe could have five prime ministers from truly conservative parties by this time next year, this will create a new situation on the political map of the continent. This could upset the political logic of the past. I am optimistic, because even a small shift in the centre of gravity can influence who Europe's top leaders will be. 2024 will bring very exciting events, and I would like to play an active role in ensuring that more and more people in Hungary and abroad can get to know the Hungarian formula in order to forge as many alliances as possible.
Until then, however, there is another year to go, and there are some important things in progress that you have or can have something to do with. One of them is the issue of EU funds. For example, news has recently spread that some of the money withheld from Hungary and Poland has already been channeled to Ukraine by the EU, with "hundreds of tricks" to hide these transactions. Is there any legal way of finding out related facts?
EU acts and decisions can be challenged in the Court of Justice of the European Union, but the political problem is much bigger than that. I have fresh memories of the last informal Council meeting in Stockholm, where we tried to imagine the everyday life of a European Union after a possible accession of eight new member states. For example, Ukraine’s GDP per capita was well below the EU average even before the war. In other words, if this country joins the EU, then all of the sudden, everyone in the current member states will become richer than the EU average on paper from one day to the other. This could render cohesion policy, which is based on the indicator of development relative to GDP, meaningless. This was pointed out by the Western friends of the cohesion countries. It is clear, therefore, that we are not alone in saying that we need to think very carefully about strategic steps in the coming period. The alarm caused by Ukrainian grain exports is only the prelude to what kind of EU awaits us if we fail to act with careful attention.
No golden apple trees will grow in Brussels in the future, so either existing resources will have to be reallocated - which means circumventing current rules and agreements - or loans will have to be taken out, which is also the wrong way to go.
Europe has and will have very serious economic challenges, and citizens cannot be left out of decisions.
During a recent presentation, you said that the European Parliament is trying to block Hungary's EU presidency because they are afraid. Because Hungary has identified the need for a rule of law scrutiny of EU institutions as one of its priorities for the rotating presidency. What does this mean in practice?
It means exactly what they are afraid of. I’ll give you another experience from Stockholm: I attended a symposium on the rule of law, and I started by saying that I was the only person in the room who could provide any first hand information on Article 7 or on the rule of law procedures. While everyone else is just talking about it, we have been "doing it" in our daily lives for five years. I used the Hungarian example to stress that shared values cannot be used for exercising political pressure. The court president attending the meeting could only respond to this by listing cases going back 20 or 30 years, which proved that institutions must also comply with legal regulations. So the word is getting around about our idea, about our goal, and putting the issue on the agenda is more important than whether any EU document will eventually come out on this subject during our presidency. We must ask the question: does the hangman have a hanging permit? Our political opponents also need to conduct some self-examination. And there are plenty of reasons for a rule of law scrutiny, take the European Commission's asset declaration system for example.
It has recently come to light that a director-general, who is roughly the counterpart of a state secretary in our country, does not have any obligation to declare assets. And so it could happen that a director-general takes action against us because of our asset declaration procedure, and the person owns a luxury hotel in Bali.
And he made no secret of this. How come this is not be a problem in the Commission’s eyes? We know that an enormous amount of development funds go to the Third World, and this is a source of income that compares to the income commissioners make. How come you are not required to provide an itemised income report? With a little exaggeration, we are soon being asked to disclose publicly all of our great-grandchildren's asset declaration. This example shows the EU’s current way of functioning: if there is political will, they will find their own interpretation of the law. I also pointed out at the symposium I mentioned earlier that this is no longer the rule of law, but it is precisely the erosion of the rule of law: it is not the law that defines the framework, but the framework is adapted to political goals. When we ask everyone to remain within their competence, we are not acting against the rule of law, but in defence of it.
We need to make the institutions and some politicians understand that they cannot do everything they want.
And I haven't even touched on corruption existing in the European Parliament...
Is there, will there be any receptivity to these proposals in the European Parliament?
It is very important to talk about these issues and include them in everyday political debates. There are those who see the rule of law debates as a kind of mission, like the people in the George Soros’s network. That is their job and, of course, that's why they say terrible things about us. But I think - and I may be optimistic - that many of our international critics who are involved in this misguided rule of law fight can be convinced by asking them the right questions.
I have also noticed that some member states vote in favour of certain decisions even if it is not good for them, believing that in exchange for an apparently false European unity and behaviour, no one will ever hold them to account if they fail to implement the decisions at home.
The senseless forcing of an ever deepening Europe will lead to disintegration. Honesty, a clear definition of the national interest and mutual respect are needed to keep the Union together. And then we will return to what the European fathers came up with seventy years ago, that the objective is not suppressing the states, but giving them a greater scope for action, enabling all of us to succeed and feel pleased at each other's success.
