Person

NAGY, Csongor István

EUI affiliated iconORCID icon
Profile Picture
Email Address
Birth Date
Research Projects
relationships.isOrgUnitOf
Job Title
Last Name
NAGY
First Name
Csongor István
Name

Filters

2020 - 20212
Reset filters

Settings

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Open Access
    Questions of integrity
    (2021, Article) 
    Verfassungsblog, 2021, OnlineOnly
    Many have rightly criticized the Commission for failing to robustly defend the EU’s founding values from academic freedom, to media freedom, to judicial independence, to the rights of refugees or the LGBT community. In these discussions, the Commission’s failure to take action against another form of discrimination is generally ignored: discrimination against national minorities. Looking at the example of Hungarian communities in other member states, this post highlights the Commission’s asymmetric idea about the EU’s founding values and its appalling failure to defend ethnic/national minorities against discrimination. This is in stark contrast with the fact that the protection of and respect for minorities is a founding value of the EU, ranked equally to democracy, rule of law and human dignity.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Publication
    Open Access
    The Commission's AI Capone tricks
    (2020, Article) 
    Verfassungsblog, 2020, OnlineOnly
    In October, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) handed down a landmark judgment dealing with the Central European University (CEU). It found that Hungary had violated the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) by failing to provide national treatment to the CEU. It was obvious that the case, although wrapped in trade law, had absolutely nothing to do with international trade: it was an EU rule of law dispute between the European Commission (Commission) and Hungary. The reason why it was not presented as such was that the EU reckoned that it had no power to address the rule of law issue directly and, hence, had resort to some “legal finesse”. The ruling fits in a relatively sizeable list of cases where the CJEU employed Al Capone tricks to foster rule of law. As is well-known, Al Capone was not convicted for what he should have been but for what he could be (tax fraud). In the same vein, at times, the Commission used the “supportive by-effects” of apparently unconnected EU norms.