The European Commission is proposing that future European Union members remain under enhanced rule-of-law monitoring for up to 15 years after accession, aiming to prevent democratic backsliding and make it easier to impose penalties on countries that undermine judicial independence and democratic institutions.
The proposal forms part of the Commission’s enlargement strategy, presented on October 6. It seeks to address concerns that a country could comply with EU requirements before joining the bloc but weaken democratic standards once membership is secured.
The initiative draws on the experiences of Hungary under former Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, whose government repeatedly used its veto power to obstruct EU decisions on foreign policy, including sanctions against Russia and financial assistance for Ukraine.
Concerns over Hungary began with domestic rule-of-law issues. After taking office in 2010, Orbán’s government introduced a new constitution, changed the judicial system, placed the Constitutional Court under greater political influence and reshaped the media and electoral systems. The EU subsequently launched proceedings against Hungary under Article 7 of the bloc’s treaty and froze billions of euros in funding.
The European Commission’s proposed safeguards are intended to allow faster action against future member states that reverse democratic reforms.
However, experts question whether the mechanism will be sufficient to prevent long-term democratic backsliding.
“Preventing regression in the rule of law in member states is extremely difficult, as we have seen not only in Hungary but also in Poland,” Stephen Blockmans, deputy director of the Centre for International and Security Studies, told Radio Free Europe.
How the Proposed Safeguards Would Work
The main innovation concerns voting procedures. Under the proposal, certain rights of a new member state, including voting rights, could be suspended by qualified majority voting rather than unanimity.
Article 7 procedures currently face significant political and procedural obstacles because key decisions require broad agreement among member states. Hungary and Slovakia have previously opposed measures targeting governments over rule-of-law concerns.
Blockmans said the new system was designed to overcome this obstacle by introducing qualified majority voting for the proposed safeguards.
During the first 15 years after accession, the EU could also use financial conditionality to respond to democratic backsliding, including by suspending funding from the bloc’s budget.
The same principle would apply before membership. According to the Commission’s accompanying working document, payments to candidate countries would be tied to commitments under their reform plans, allowing Brussels to respond more quickly if democratic reforms were reversed.
European Commissioner for Enlargement Marta Kos has stressed that the safeguards would not affect countries that continue to respect EU rules and values.
Lessons From Hungary, Poland and Slovakia
Poland provides another example of the difficulties the EU faces in addressing democratic backsliding. Under the previous Law and Justice government, changes to the Constitutional Tribunal and the body responsible for judicial appointments, alongside disciplinary measures against judges, prompted action from Brussels.
The European Commission initiated Article 7 proceedings against Poland in 2017. In 2021, the EU Court of Justice imposed a daily fine of €1 million on Warsaw over a dispute involving judicial independence.
In Slovakia, Prime Minister Robert Fico’s government has faced criticism since returning to power in 2023 after abolishing the Special Prosecutor’s Office responsible for corruption cases, reducing penalties for economic crimes and restructuring public broadcasting in ways critics say increased political control.
The proposed 15-year safeguard, however, would have limits. Blockmans warned that democratic backsliding could still occur after the monitoring period ends.
Hungary and Poland both joined the EU in 2004. Orbán secured a two-thirds parliamentary majority six years later, while Law and Justice came to power in Poland after 11 years of EU membership. Both cases illustrate how democratic reversals can emerge during the proposed monitoring period.
Slovakia highlights a different limitation: it has been an EU member since 2004, meaning measures introduced by Fico almost two decades after accession would fall outside the proposed 15-year safeguard.
Different Rules for New and Existing Members
The proposal could also create different enforcement arrangements for newer and existing EU members. The enhanced safeguards would apply only to countries joining in the future, while current members would remain subject to the bloc’s existing procedures, including the unanimity requirement under Article 7.
Corina Stratulat, an analyst at the European Policy Centre in Brussels, said the safeguards could help manage risks associated with enlargement but would not, on their own, resolve the EU’s broader institutional challenges.
She warned that countries joining at different times could face different enforcement mechanisms despite being subject to the same underlying obligations.
“This distinction matters for the legitimacy of the enlargement process,” Stratulat said.
The proposal also builds on earlier forms of post-accession monitoring. Bulgaria and Romania, which joined the EU in 2007, were subject to a Cooperation and Verification Mechanism covering judicial reform and the fight against corruption. That arrangement ended in 2023 after 16 years but did not provide for sanctions comparable to those envisaged under the new proposal.
Western Balkans Expected to Be First in Line
The Western Balkans is likely to be the first region affected by the new safeguards. EU reports have repeatedly highlighted shortcomings in the rule of law and concerns over pressure on judicial institutions and the media in parts of the region.
The Commission has already expanded its annual rule-of-law reporting to cover Albania, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia, in addition to EU member states.
The proposed mechanism would link this monitoring more directly to financial consequences after accession.
Montenegro, the most advanced Western Balkan candidate in the accession process, aims to become the EU’s 28th member in 2028. Kos has said that Montenegro’s accession treaty would be the first to include the new safeguards.
If Montenegro joins in 2028 and the proposed 15-year period applies as outlined, enhanced monitoring could continue until 2043.
Croatia offers a precedent for post-accession safeguards, although its arrangements were more limited. When Croatia joined the EU in 2013, it faced a special safeguard covering justice and home affairs, alongside European Commission monitoring. That clause could be activated only during the first three years of membership.
Safeguards Aimed at Winning Public Support for Enlargement
The Commission’s strategy is also intended to reassure voters in existing EU member states, whose parliaments must ratify accession treaties. In France, ratification could also involve a referendum.
According to the spring 2026 Eurobarometer survey cited in the report, 53% of EU citizens supported enlargement. In France, however, 54% opposed further enlargement, while 35% supported it.
A separate 2025 survey found that the most common concern among respondents was ensuring that new member states respect the rule of law and combat corruption.
Blockmans said safeguards could help address public concerns by demonstrating that new members would face enforceable obligations after joining.
The proposed rules are intended to reduce fears that future members could undermine EU decision-making or weaken democratic standards once they have secured membership.
Whether the mechanism will prove effective will depend on its final design, how it is incorporated into accession treaties and whether EU institutions can apply it consistently over the proposed 15-year period.
