Minister Tuzson said Hungary is taking legal action against the European Court itself, noting that such a step is unprecedented in the history of the European Union.
He recalled that in 2020 the Court ruled against Hungary over the operation of transit zones along the border, where arriving migrants were required to wait. Hungary subsequently amended its rules, introducing a system under which anyone seeking to enter the country must first submit a preliminary application at a Hungarian embassy in a neighboring country.
According to Minister Tuzson, these regulations were challenged in an effort to force Hungary to change its migration policy, and the European Commission turned to the Court requesting financial penalties. At the conclusion of the case, Hungary was subjected to an unprecedented fine in EU history: a lump sum of EUR 200 million and a daily penalty of EUR 1 million, which are deducted from EU funds otherwise due to Hungary.
The justice minister pointed out that while the European Commission had sought a significantly smaller amount, the Court imposed a lump sum 29 times higher than requested and a daily penalty 61 times higher.
Minister Tuzson stressed that since the ruling is final, Hungary is not challenging the judgment itself, but is instead launching a damages action. Under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, if an EU institution causes damage to a member state, it is obliged to provide compensation, he said.
He argued that the European Court failed to observe several procedural rules and fundamental principles that should have been applied during the proceedings, thereby violating Hungary’s rights. As a result, Hungary is seeking compensation so that a significant portion of the imposed fine would be paid by the Court, rather than by Hungary, to the European Union.
Minister Tuzson explained that the right to a fair trial is guaranteed at the level of fundamental principles. If a court intends to impose a penalty many times higher than the amount requested during proceedings, it must inform the defendant in advance so it can prepare accordingly. He added that the fine should have been determined within the framework of the original submission.
He also criticized the Court for failing to meet its obligation to provide proper reasoning, as it did not adequately justify the exceptionally high amount of the fine. By imposing such an unprecedented penalty, the Court also violated the principle of equality among member states, Minister Tuzson said, noting that Hungary was fined far more heavily than other countries, including some with significantly larger GDPs, in comparable cases.
According to the minister, the Court also breached the principles of legal certainty, foreseeability and transparency.
Minister Tuzson concluded that these circumstances show the case is not truly legal in nature, but rather driven by ideological and political motivations. He said Brussels wants Hungary to admit migrants, something the government refuses to do, adding that this is why the lawsuit has been initiated.