On Wednesday, the European Parliament is waiting for another key vote regarding developments in Slovakia. Only a month after the MPs officially opposed Robert Fico’s government in April, they will approve an extensive document in Strasbourg on the state of the rule of law, fundamental rights and the misuse of European Union funds in Slovakia.
The move follows a sharp plenary debate in February and confirms that the EU institutions are viewing the current government’s actions with growing concern. Although the wording itself carries an extremely critical tone, Wednesday’s decision does not yet directly mean that Slovakia will lose billions of euros from European resources with immediate effect.
According to the deputies, Article 363 is being misused
Wednesday’s draft resolution is a summary of several MEPs’ reservations, across several sectors of public life and Slovak legislation. Much of the criticism centers on changes in criminal law and institutional interventions.
Deputies react with concern to the reduction of punishments for corruption, shortening of limitation periods and especially to the abolition of the Special Prosecutor’s Office and the National Criminal Agency. According to the document, these steps are already leading to delays in investigations, which have been transferred to other authorities, and a significant decrease in the number of corruption cases solved.
The MEPs also draw attention to the risks associated with the broad powers of the Prosecutor General based on section 363, which, according to the MEPs, may allow the suspension or extension of criminal proceedings for formal reasons without sufficient guarantees.
Considerable displeasure in Brussels was also caused by the fact that a large part of the disputed Slovak legislation was adopted in an accelerated mode – according to the resolution, this affected up to a fifth of all approved laws in 2025, which limited the space for meaningful professional and parliamentary debate.
The case of haciendas is coming up again
Another fundamental topic covered by the resolution is the protection of the Union’s financial interests. MEPs draw attention to ongoing concerns regarding the functioning of the Agricultural Payments Agency and structural failures in its control mechanisms.
The document also explicitly mentions suspicions of misuse of European funds intended for rural development and tourism for the construction or renovation of luxurious private residences, so-called haciendas, which have no clear added value for the European Union.
If these practices were confirmed, according to the resolution, it would be a serious violation of the principles of sound financial management and a violation of public trust in the Union budget.
Problematic interference with the media
The resolution is also sharply reserved against interventions in the media environment. Political interference in the public broadcaster raises serious concerns among MPs, mentioning the creation of the STVR Council composed exclusively of nominees of the government coalition and pressure on employees.
The European Parliament also criticizes the hostile environment towards journalists and civil society, the use of strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP) and the administrative burden for NGOs, which face various smear campaigns and intimidation.
The resolution also deals in detail with the issue of human and minority rights. It calls on the Slovak authorities to ensure the effective protection of the rights of LGBTIQ+ persons, as well as to end the segregation of Roma in education and address their access to health care. It also mentions the need to prevent violence against women and urges the ratification of the Istanbul Convention.
What will be the consequences of acceptance?
A positive point in an otherwise critical text is the section dedicated to the protection of whistleblowers of anti-social activity. In the document, the MEPs welcome the decision of the Slovak Parliament from March 2026, which, after months of disputes and the intervention of the Constitutional Court, repealed the controversial law, thanks to which the Office for the Protection of Whistleblowers was preserved.
The adoption of Wednesday’s document will not result in an immediate stoppage of the flow of money to Slovakia, as the European Parliament does not have the competence to directly freeze funds. However, this is an extremely strong political pressure on the European Commission, which has these tools in its hands.
In the text, MEPs call on the Commission to assess whether there is a clear risk of a serious violation of fundamental values in Slovakia, and not to hesitate to use all coercive measures, including infringement proceedings, intensified audits, suspension of payments and application of financial corrections. They also request the intensification of targeted controls in cooperation with the European Anti-Fraud Office and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.
April call for suspension of European funds
The current tension is the culmination of a process that intensified in April after the adoption of a report by German MEP Daniel Freund. At that time, with 418 votes, the Parliament officially asked the Commission for the first time ever to start the conditionality mechanism.
After visiting the control committees in Bratislava, Freund stated that the arguments of Prime Minister Robert Fico did not convince the MEPs, emphasizing that the Union had learned from the long-term lethargy towards Hungary and wanted to intervene more forcefully and in time this time.
“I didn’t get the impression that he really tried to convince us during this meeting. He spent most of the time explaining to us how much worse the government was before him. However, we weren’t there on some historical research mission, we came to look at the current situation in the country,” commented Freund.
Endangering national interests
On the domestic political scene, the actions of the European institutions provoke strongly polarized reactions. While representatives of the government coalition and President Peter Pellegrini describe the behavior of the European Parliament as a targeted attack and an attempt to punish Slovakia for the sovereign positions of the government, the opposition speaks of an international shame and a threat to national interests.
The complexity of the situation and the sensitivity of the topic were fully demonstrated during the aforementioned April vote, when MEPs for the strongest opposition party, Progressive Slovakia, decided to boycott the vote on their own country. At the time, they explained their position by saying that they do not want to use their vote to harm ordinary citizens and block vital resources, but at the same time they refuse to politically cover the actions of the current cabinet, which they believe are subverting the rule of law.
Wednesday’s vote will show how determined the European Parliament is to pressure the Commission to move from warnings to harsh sanctions in the case of Slovakia.
