Ian Cooper

The first PROSPER Network Event, “Safeguarding Fundamental European Values in EU Economic Governance,” was held on 27 March 2025 at the Democracy Institute of Central European University in Budapest, Hungary. The event began with welcoming remarks from Laszlo Bruszt (Director, CEU Democracy Institute) and Federico Fabbrini (DCU, Principal Investigator of PROSPER).

These were followed by a keynote address from Adam Bodnar, the Minister of Justice for Poland, whose country holds the Presidency of the Council of the EU. Bodnar said that Poland supports a stronger Europe, particularly in the context of the changed leadership in the US and the ongoing war in Ukraine. Poland provides an example to the rest of the EU that a member state can undergo a rule of law crisis and still transition back to democracy. He said that the mechanisms in the EU’s Rule of Law Toolbox – rule of law reports, conditionality of access to EU funds, infringement proceedings before the ECJ – proved effective in the case of Poland. He warned that illiberal regimes can infringe not only political but also economic liberty, having a negative effect on the economic governance of the EU. Ultimately European leaders must convince citizens that the European way of life is good for all of us and must be defended. Poland has made a priority of security, which means not only a strong defence but also tacking weaponized migration and unregulated social media. Finally he approved of the European democracy shield, in particular because it would protect civil society, which was a crucial factor in ensuring the victory of the forces of fundamental European values in the last Polish election. 

This was followed by a brief intervention from Polina Li, Advisor to Olha Stefanishyna, the Deputy Prime Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration, and Minister of Justice of Ukraine. Ms Li has been one of key coordinators of Ukraine’s major EU integration reforms in the Rule of Law area and has overseen the preparation of the Rule of Law roadmap.  She spoke of progress in the ongoing Ukrainian accession negotiations, in particular with respect to the rule of law, the judiciary and fundamental rights. Ms Li argued that there is a strong foundation to align Ukraine with the principles that are the fundamental values of the EU. 

These opening speeches were followed by two panels, an academic panel and a think tank panel. The first panel, “Between Rule of Law Conditionality and Economic Governance of a Changing Union” had an academic focus, and was chaired by Niels Kirst (DCU). To begin, Lina Papadopoulou (Aristotle University of Thessaloniki) set the scene by laying out in stark terms several current challenges that threaten the fundamental values embedded in European constitutionalism. These challenges include: an outdated European social contract and the fraying of the post-war compromise, coupled with the rise of populism that creates a discrepancy between procedural democracy and constitutionalism; economic and demographic crises requiring a leap in innovation and competitiveness; an migration influx that is fraying the social fabric; and a the challenge of economic governance in war, requiring a kind of political triage – a choice between defence and the social state. Following this, Paulina Lenik (Jagiellonian University, Krakow) gave a preliminary overview of her forthcoming research on cohesion funds and institutional trust in Poland, asking the key question of whether and in what way the receipt of EU funds has affected political attitudes in different regions of that country. The next speakers were Thomas Christiansen and Dora Hegedus (LUISS Guido Carli, Rome), who presented their work on internal dissensus in the European Commission, comparing its role in the management of two recent crises – the sovereign debt crisis and the rule of law crisis. They maintain that dissensus is necessary for democracy, but it may be constructive or destructive. In the case of the sovereign debt crisis, the Commission was arguably part of the problem, but in the rule of law crisis it was part of the solution, helping to manage destructive dissensus. Following this, Inna Melnykovska (CEU Vienna – CEU Democracy Institute) gave a detailed and thoughtful presentation on how to build a Ukrainian Development Bank. She debated different functional models and mechanisms of governance and oversight for this institution, drawing on historical lessons from Ukraine’s reform experience. These presentations drew initial reaction from the commentator, Piero Tortola (University of Groningen), as well as several questions from the audience leading to a robust exchange of views. 

The second panel, “Trends, Threats, Risks Impacting EU Economic Governance” was chaired by Renata Uitz (CEU Democracy Institute – Royal Holloway, University of London) and featured several speakers from the think tank world. To begin, Bulcsu Hunyadi (Political Capital, Budapest) offered several reflections on the Hungarian Presidency of the Council of the EU which took place in the second half of 2024. He pointed out that it was a transitional presidency (occurring during the installation of the new Commission), and that some had spoken of stripping Hungary of the presidency due to its violations of the fundamental values of the EU. In the end, the presidency vacillated between honest broker tactics, which led to some legislative achievements, and spoiler tactics, which gave the Orban government an opportunity to engage in freelance foreign policy-making. As a point of comparison, Wojciech Przybylski (Res Publica / Visegrad Insight, Warsaw) discussed the Polish Presidency of the Council of the EU, which was just at its halfway point. There have been some achievements of the Polish Council Presidency, but in internal matters the government is still limited by the fact that it is in cohabitation with the president from the previous party. The coming Presidential election in Poland will determine the future of the country. Remarking on Hungary and Trump, the speaker warned us never to underestimate the power of ridiculous ideas. A Ukrainian perspective was provided by Hennadiy Maksak (Ukrainian Prism, Brussels and Kyiv), who reflected on the state of the war with Russia and relations with the EU, as well as the prospects for accession. More broadly, Maja Bobic (European Movement International) outlined many of the challenges in continuing to engage European citizens at a time of rising populism and diminishing faith in democracy. Finally a commentary was provided by Visnja Vukov (University of Vienna – CEU Democracy Institute), followed by several questions and a lively debate. 

Ian Cooper is Research Coordinator of the PROSPER Jean Monnet Network and Senior Research Fellow at the Dublin City University and the Dublin European Law Institute (DELI). 

The views expressed in this blog reflect the position of the author and not necessarily that of the PROSPER network.