European Commission examines Slovakia’s anti-Hungarian law

The European Commission has confirmed that it is examining concerns raised over Slovakia’s recent legal changes related to the controversial Beneš Decrees, following a formal letter sent by Katalin Szili, a senior adviser to the Hungarian prime minister.

The European Commission started an investigation regarding Slovakia’s new law

Commission spokesperson Markus Lammert stated that Brussels has received Szili’s submission and is currently assessing the issues outlined in it. The letter was addressed to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and focuses on a recent amendment to Slovakia’s Criminal Code, which could allow prison sentences of up to six months for publicly criticising the Beneš Decrees.

Szili, who serves as the prime minister’s adviser on autonomy efforts in the Carpathian Basin, published an open version of the letter on her social media page earlier this month. She argued that the Slovak amendment represents a serious breach of the European Union’s core legal principles, particularly freedom of expression and the rule of law, writes 24.hu.

In her view, the legislation conflicts with Article 11 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, which guarantees freedom of opinion and access to information. Szili stressed that debate over historically and legally significant state actions, including the Beneš Decrees, clearly falls within the realm of public interest and should not be subject to criminal sanctions.

• Russian executive linked to Hungary’s Paks II project detained over alleged funding of Ukrainian army

What are the Beneš Decrees, and why are they controversial?

The Beneš Decrees, adopted after the Second World War, formed the legal basis for the collective punishment of ethnic Germans and Hungarians in former Czechoslovakia. They enabled widespread confiscation of property and the stripping of citizenship. Although decades have passed, their legal legacy continues to have tangible consequences.

According to reports, Slovak authorities still rely on the decrees during land confiscation procedures. In some cases, the state argues that agricultural and forest land should have been seized in the late 1940s, and therefore proceeds to confiscate property today from current owners or their heirs. Critics argue that this practice raises serious questions about legal certainty and may even infringe on the EU principle of the free movement of capital.

Szili later revealed that she had also sent a separate, more detailed version of her letter directly to the European Commission. In that document, she not only criticised the recent Criminal Code amendment but also challenged the continued application of the Beneš Decrees themselves. She has not confirmed whether the letter was coordinated with the Hungarian government or PM Viktor Orbán himself, stating only that she was under no obligation to seek prior approval and that no objections were raised.

• Another Hungarian citizen has been released from prison in Venezuela

How did prominent government figures react? And how did the opposition?

Slovakia’s government has said it sees no reason to amend its legislation but respects Szili’s decision to turn to EU institutions. Meanwhile, reactions in Hungary have been mixed. Government figures, including Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and Minister Gergely Gulyás, have condemned the principle of collective guilt but urged caution, noting that the new Slovak law has not yet been applied in practice, so far not hurting anybody, so it makes no sense to protest.

In contrast, Péter Magyar, leader of the Tisza Party, has taken a more confrontational stance, calling on Slovakia’s Prime Minister Robert Fico to withdraw the amendment and reopen dialogue in the interest of peaceful coexistence.

• Péter Magyar urges Slovak PM Fico to suspend Beneš Decrees ahead of Hungarian elections