Not part of an EU treaty. As lets face it if the EU had actual laws requiring a member nation to express approved political views. No nation would join.

As far as I know. That also applies to every other international treaty. They tend to limit actions not political opinions or speech.

[–] LarkinDePark@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I was talking about actions. Many EU states are supporting the genocide through funding and direct contributions of military support and distribution of materiel.

[–] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 1 points 6 months ago

Again not covered by the EU agreement. Although a few EU members argue strongly for military unification. It was raised by many during brexit as a reason to leave the EU. So again unlikely to find full upport in the near future.

Currently the supply of arms and weapons is totally uncovered by EU trade agreements. NATO has some agreements. But non that cover this.

The thing people forget. International law dose not really exist beyond atual agreements nations are willing to commit to. Unfortunately as the world is a bloody long way from a utopia. Most nations are unwilling to agree to things that limit their own military actions. So nothing most other nations can do.

The closest we ever came is post WW2 where the Geneva convention and ICC was set up.

But as you can see. No nation is forced to abide by such rules. The US and Russia make i clear. Might makes right until some event leaves oa nation on the losing side of a battle with enough losses of resources to need help from other nations.

What the rest of the world thinks in wars is still pretty much unimportant to the events.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 5 points 6 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

Hungary has been ordered to pay a €200m (£169m) fine for its refusal to uphold the rights of asylum seekers in what was described as an “unprecedented” breach of EU law by the bloc’s highest court.

The European court of justice in Luxembourg also ordered Budapest to pay €1m a day until it complies with EU laws guaranteeing refugees the right to claim asylum inside Hungarian borders.

Responding to the judgment, the Hungarian prime minister, Viktor Orbán, described the court’s ruling as “outrageous and unacceptable”, adding: “It seems that illegal migrants are more important to the Brussels bureaucrats than their own European citizens.”

It highlights the profound challenge to the bloc posed by anti-EU, nationalist leaders at a time when far-right forces made advances in European elections in France, Germany and Austria, and are expected to join the government in the Netherlands.

Judges also criticised Hungary’s decision that it would not comply with the 2020 ruling until it had received a verdict from its national constitutional court, a profound challenge to the supremacy of EU law that Budapest agreed on entering the bloc.

The reference to an “unprecedented” breach of EU law is understood to stem from Hungary’s implacable refusal to amend its policy after the 2020 ruling, and is reflected in the fine.

The original article contains 631 words, the summary contains 214 words. Saved 66%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] RubberDuck@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

You can always leave the EU if you don't like the treaty/laws/rules your country signed up for.