Pécs: The Article 7 procedure against Hungary has entered a new phase as a European Parliament delegation completes a rule of law visit this week. MEPs from the Civil Liberties committee travelled to Hungary to judge how far the government of Péter Magyar, in office since spring 2026, has repaired the damage of the Orbán years. Parliament triggered the Article 7 procedure in September 2018, and it has never been closed.

Members who visited earlier this month already offered a cautious verdict. Jean-Marc Germain of the Socialists and Democrats said Hungary has clearly changed from the Orbán era, citing civil liberties, freedom of expression and integrity in public life. He urged vigilance, because people appointed under Orbán still hold some key administrative posts, and he questioned political pluralism since Magyar’s Tisza party dominates parliament.

Daniel Freund of the Greens and European Free Alliance believes many preconditions for releasing EU funds are probably met, following the Commission’s proposal in late September. He warned that the Commission may move too fast given the large sums involved in a short period. He also flagged two open problems, asylum rights and LGBTIQ+ rights, where Hungary has not yet complied with rulings of the Court of Justice.

Moritz Körner of Renew Europe welcomed the legislative push that produced anti-corruption measures. He noted that breaking the rule of law is much easier than repairing it, a warning that reforms passed in months can still take years to take root. The mix of praise and caution shows that no political group wants to declare victory too early, and it hints at the debate that will follow the delegation’s report to the committee and the plenary.

Freund said the Parliament mission to Budapest would end by the end of October and that Parliament, which started the Article 7 procedure, should decide when to end it. He argued that a resolution could follow once the delegation reports back. Such a text would signal whether the chamber accepts the government’s progress or demands more evidence.

Hungary’s case also tests how the Union treats a government that changes course after years of conflict with Brussels. The decision matters beyond Hungary. If MEPs conclude that the reforms are real, the Article 7 procedure could move toward closure and unlock a settlement on frozen funds. If they find gaps in asylum, minority rights or the independence of key institutions, the Article 7 procedure will stay open as a lever, and the Commission will face pressure to slow the flow of money.