In a written parliamentary question on 13 July 2026, MEP Alexander Jungbluth (ESN) challenged the European Commission on the objectivity and consistency of the EU's rule of law mechanism, raising concerns that political influence may undermine its application. The question targets the annual rule of law cycle, including country visits and dialogues, as well as the use of Article 7 procedures and the conditionality regulation (Regulation 2020/2092).
The MEP asked three specific questions. First, how the Commission ensures that decisions on which Member States to prioritise for annual visits and dialogues are purely objective and free from political influence. Second, what measures guarantee a uniform and comparable approach when deciding on the introduction and intensity of measures across Member States facing similar challenges. Third, what safeguards exist to ensure that Article 7 measures are lifted only after specifically agreed reforms are implemented, rather than due to shifting political influences.
The question reflects a broader debate about the balance between EU-level oversight and national sovereignty, with the MEP implying that the current mechanism may be applied unevenly. The Commission is expected to respond within approximately six weeks, and its answer will signal its position on the transparency and impartiality of the rule of law framework.
Stakeholders affected include EU institutions, which face scrutiny over their enforcement methods; Member States subject to rule of law procedures, which may seek clearer criteria; and civil society organisations monitoring rule of law compliance, who rely on consistent application. The question does not propose specific numerical targets or deadlines but calls for procedural safeguards.