In the EU, but under surveillance: New rules for future members

The European Union aims for countries that will join in the future to remain under increased supervision for the rule of law for up to 15 years after accession.

This is the essence of the European Commission's enlargement strategy, which was presented on October 6.

The goal is for the bloc to no longer have another Viktor Orban, or, as EU Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos previously stated, to not accept "troops" who would become active after EU membership.

Former Hungarian Prime Minister Orban, who remained in power for 16 years, frequently used his veto power to block or hinder EU decision-making on foreign policy – ​​from sanctions against Russia to financial aid to Ukraine.

But the problems began within Hungary itself, with the rule of law.

After taking power in 2010, he adopted a new constitution, took control of the Constitutional Court, and removed hundreds of judges through mandatory retirement.

He also took control of most of the media and changed the electoral system – actions that led to the initiation of proceedings against Hungary under Article 7 of the EU Treaty and the freezing of billions of euros in European funds.

The new rules proposed by the European Commission aim to enable a member state that regresses in the rule of law to be punished more quickly and easily than was possible in the case of Hungary.

However, the main question is whether this can work.

"Preventing regression in the rule of law in member states is extremely difficult, as we have seen not only in Hungary but also in Poland," Stephen Blockmans, deputy director of the International Center for Defense and Security, tells Radio Free Europe.

In Poland, the previous Law and Justice Party government took control of the Constitutional Court and the body responsible for appointing judges, and imposed disciplinary measures against judges.

For this reason, the European Commission first activated the Article 7 procedure in 2017, while the EU Court of Justice fined Warsaw one million euros per day in 2021.

In Slovakia, Robert Fico's government, as of 2023, abolished the Special Prosecution Office for Corruption, softened sentences for economic crimes, and placed the public broadcaster under political control, prompting warnings from Brussels and the European Parliament.

How is Article 7 intended to be circumvented?

The innovation in the Commission's proposal lies in the voting method, and this is precisely where the difference between current and future member states lies.

Instead of unanimity, the rights of a regressing new member state, including voting rights, can be suspended by qualified majority.

Blockmans recalls that the unanimity requirement, stipulated in Article 7, has for years protected countries that have violated the rules.

Slovakia, “in coordination with Orbán’s Hungary,” has blocked such decisions in the past. “This new system aims to unblock this procedural obstacle by introducing qualified majority voting,” says Blockmans.

During the first 15 years after accession, the safeguard clause would facilitate the taking of measures against a regressing state, mainly through financial conditionality, namely the suspension of funds from the European Union budget.

"This is the innovation that the Commission is proposing," says Blockmans.

In practice, European funds, which constitute a key source of investment for Balkan economies, would become the main instrument for maintaining the independence of courts and media even after EU membership.

The same logic is expected to be applied even before membership.

In the working document accompanying the strategy, the European Commission emphasizes that the new instrument would condition payments to candidate countries on fulfilling obligations set out in their reform plans.

This would enable the EU to react more quickly if a country "signals a regression in democratic reforms."

The safeguard clause would not be activated if the new member country does not regress in the area of ​​the rule of law and democracy during this period.

Commissioner Kos emphasized on several occasions that the safeguard mechanisms will not have an impact on countries that respect the rules and values ​​of the European Union.

Time-limited mechanism

Blockmans does not believe this is the final solution, as this system also carries risks.

According to him, after the end of the 15-year probationary period, "there is still the possibility of regression."

The experience with Hungary and Poland shows that this time period was not determined by chance.

Both countries joined the EU in 2004.

Orban won a two-thirds majority in Parliament six years later, while the Law and Justice Party took power in Poland after 11 years of membership.

Both crises would have started within the probationary period.

However, Orban's system continued to function long after its end, while the EU, even two decades after Hungary's accession, failed to find an effective response.

The example of Slovakia shows the other side of this time constraint.

Slovakia has also been a member of the EU since 2004, so the measures taken by Fico, almost two decades after accession, would fall outside the scope of the 15-year clause.

Long-term surveillance is not a novelty in itself.

Bulgaria and Romania, after accession in 2007, were subject to a special Cooperation and Verification Mechanism in the field of justice and the fight against corruption, which ended in 2023.

This supervision lasted 16 years, but did not foresee sanctions.

The new clause would be distinctive precisely because it would link oversight to funding and, in the most extreme case, to voting rights.

Different status for current and future members

There is another problem, which creates differences between member states.

The safeguard clause would only apply to new members, while countries that are already part of the EU would continue to be protected by the unanimity requirement, provided for in Article 7.

Corina Stratulat, an analyst at the European Policy Centre (EPC) in Brussels, warns that safeguards help manage the risks of enlargement, but do not necessarily make the European Union ready for enlargement.

"Procedural safeguards do not resolve the broader inconsistency. The obligations in question are common to all member states. However, the ability to ensure their implementation would vary depending on when a country joined. In the event of a serious breach by a new member, a mechanism designed to overcome political obstacles could be applied. In the meantime, existing members would continue to be subject to the usual EU instruments," says Stratulat.

"This distinction is important for the very legitimacy of the enlargement process," she assesses.

The Western Balkans as the first test

The first country where the new rules will be implemented will almost certainly be the Western Balkans.

For the region, where European Commission reports find year after year insufficient progress in the rule of law and pressures on the judiciary and the media, the 15-year clause is both a security mechanism and a reflection of the situation.

In fact, the surveillance has already begun.

The European Commission's annual rule of law report, which previously only included EU member states, now also covers four Western Balkan countries: Albania, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia.

The 15-year clause would link this oversight to concrete consequences.

Montenegro has advanced the most in the integration process and aims to become the 28th member of the EU in 2028.

Commissioner Kos warned that Montenegro's accession treaty will be the first to include the new safeguard mechanisms.

If this goal is realized, Montenegro would be subject to increased oversight in the area of ​​the rule of law until 2043.

Such a precedent exists, but in a much milder form.

Croatia joined the EU in 2013 with a special safeguard clause for justice and home affairs, as well as supervision by the European Commission.

However, this clause could only be activated during the first three years after accession.

Safeguard clauses as a tool to convince voters in the EU

The accession treaties must be ratified by the parliaments of all member countries, and in France, likely also through a referendum.

The most important audience to which the European Commission's new strategy is addressed is not the candidate countries, but the voters in the states that are already members of the EU.

According to the latest Eurobarometer, from spring 2026, 53 percent of EU citizens support enlargement.

However, in France, 54 percent are against enlargement, while only 35 percent support it.

In another poll on enlargement, conducted in 2025, the majority of respondents, 44 percent, responded that for the success of enlargement it is necessary to ensure that new member states respect the rule of law and fight corruption.

Blockmans sees safeguard clauses as a way to make it easier for EU member states to accept enlargement.

As he says, with new members, existing countries share "money and power."

The clauses aim to mitigate concerns that could turn into no votes when accession treaties go to parliaments for ratification or in referendums.

"It is useful when safeguard clauses are proposed that make the obligations of the countries joining more stringent, as well as the way in which their implementation will be ensured," says Blockmans.

"This helps to convince voters that new members will not hinder the functioning of the European Union, as we have seen happen with Orban's Hungary," he concludes. /REL