The European Commission has declined to intervene in the case of Hungary granting political asylum to former Polish Minister of Justice Zbigniew Ziobro, stating that it does not comment on individual cases and that asylum applications are a matter for Member States. In a written answer to a parliamentary question from 18 MEPs, Commissioner Michael McGrath, on behalf of the Commission, noted that under EU law, an application for international protection by an EU citizen can be declared admissible by another Member State only in very exceptional circumstances listed under Protocol 24 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. The Commission reiterated that all Member States are considered safe countries in relation to asylum matters due to the level of protection of fundamental rights and freedoms.
The question, submitted on 24 February 2026 by MEPs including Sophie Wilmès (Renew) and Krzysztof Śmiszek (S&D), raised concerns that Hungary's decision to grant asylum to Ziobro—who faces 26 criminal charges in Poland—implicitly questions the independence of Poland's judiciary and undermines mutual trust and sincere cooperation under EU treaties. The MEPs asked whether the Commission was in contact with Hungarian authorities and how it assessed the admissibility of such an asylum claim under EU law.
The Commission's answer contained no concrete proposals, deadlines, or structures, offering only a declarative restatement of existing legal frameworks. By declining to assess the case or engage with Hungarian authorities, the Commission signals a hands-off approach, leaving Member States broad discretion in asylum matters even when the applicant is an EU national. This stance may disappoint MEPs seeking a stronger EU role in upholding mutual trust and rule-of-law principles.
The Commission prioritises Member State sovereignty in asylum procedures over supranational oversight, even in politically sensitive cases that could affect judicial cooperation. The answer suggests no immediate institutional follow-up; the Commission is unlikely to launch infringement proceedings or further investigate unless a clear breach of Protocol 24 is demonstrated. The ball remains in the court of the European Parliament or individual Member States to raise the issue further.