The European Parliament has urged the European Commission to assess whether Slovakia’s government poses a serious risk to EU founding values and to use all available tools to protect the bloc’s budget. MEPs cited concerns over judicial independence, anti-corruption safeguards, media freedom, minority rights, and the alleged misuse of EU funds.
Parliament issues warning to Commission
The European Parliament adopted a resolution on Wednesday with 347 votes in favour, 165 against and 25 abstentions, calling on the European Commission to examine whether there is a clear risk of a serious breach of the EU’s founding values by Slovakia’s government. The text was adopted after months of concern among MEPs about what they described as a deterioration in democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights in Slovakia.
As reported in the European Parliament press material, MEPs want the Commission to use all preventive and enforcement measures available to protect both EU values and the EU budget. They also renewed their call for infringement procedures and for the use of the EU’s rule-of-law conditionality mechanism.
Rule of law concerns deepen
According to the Parliament, the resolution follows repeated warnings about systemic deficiencies that may threaten the protection of the EU’s financial interests. The concerns centre on criminal law changes, reduced penalties for corruption and financial crimes, and the closure of specialised anti-corruption entities.
The Parliament also said it was worried about reported harassment of former anti-corruption investigators. It wants Slovakia’s authorities to strengthen judicial independence and to implement anti-corruption recommendations issued by the European Commission and Council of Europe bodies.
Changes to constitution and law
MEPs highlighted recent constitutional changes that, in their view, restrict fundamental rights and challenge the primacy of EU law. They also criticised the government’s attempted abolition of Slovakia’s whistleblower protection office.
The resolution says these developments should be seen in the wider context of governance concerns linked to the use of public money and legal safeguards. Parliament’s message to the Commission was that legal and institutional backsliding should be treated as a matter affecting the entire EU framework, not only Slovakia’s domestic politics.
Alleged misuse of EU funds
A major part of the Parliament’s concern relates to the alleged misuse of EU funds. MEPs said they were worried about the functioning of Slovakia’s agricultural paying agency and about reports that EU-funded rural development and tourism projects may have been used for the construction or renovation of luxury private estates.
The Parliament’s resolution links those allegations to the need to protect the EU budget from fraud and misuse. It argues that when oversight systems are weak, the financial interests of the Union may also be put at risk.
Media freedom and civil society
The resolution also expresses deep alarm over the deterioration of media freedom and pluralism in Slovakia. MEPs said they were concerned about political interference in public service media and about pressure on independent journalists and civil society organisations.
As reported by the European Parliament, the text also refers to pressure on civil society more broadly and urges authorities to prevent and combat violence against women. The Parliament further called for access to sexual and reproductive health and rights, including safe and legal abortion.
Minority rights and voting rights
MEPs said Slovakia must improve protections for LGBTIQ+ persons and the Roma minority. They also repeated their concerns about how EU funds are being implemented for Roma communities.
The resolution further criticised reports of the retroactive confiscation of property based on collective guilt affecting EU citizens from several minority communities. It specifically called on Slovak authorities to halt confiscations based on post-war decrees, especially those affecting the Hungarian minority.
The Parliament also stressed the need for equal access to electoral participation for Slovak citizens living abroad, in the context of the government’s plan to restrict postal voting. That issue was presented as part of the broader democratic rights debate raised in the resolution.
Background to vote
The Parliament said the latest resolution builds on earlier warnings from visiting MEPs who had raised alarms over the state of EU values and alleged misuse of EU funds in Slovakia. Those concerns were reiterated in a 2025 resolution, according to the Parliament’s background note.
In April 2026, Parliament also called for the application of the EU’s rule-of-law conditionality mechanism in Slovakia in a separate resolution tied to its review of the Commission’s management of the EU budget in 2024. The current vote therefore continues a sequence of institutional pressure aimed at pushing Bratislava to address the concerns raised in Brussels.
What the Commission may do
The core demand in the resolution is that the Commission assess whether Slovakia presents a clear risk of a serious breach of EU values and then use all available tools if needed. Those tools include infringement action and the rule-of-law conditionality mechanism, which can link access to EU funding with respect for rule-of-law standards.
The Parliament’s position signals that the issue is now framed not only as a domestic legal dispute in Slovakia, but also as a potential threat to the EU’s financial and constitutional order. By tying rule-of-law concerns to budget protection, MEPs are pressing the Commission to act with greater urgency.
The news release comes from the European Parliament, which stated that the resolution was adopted on 20 May 2026 and published on 19 May 2026. The Parliament’s press material did not attribute the resolution to individual journalists, but listed press officers Martina Vass, Kyriakos Klosidis and Jānis Krastiņš for contact purposes.
The European Parliament’s plenary agenda note also said the text follows the February 2026 debate and covers weakening judicial independence, anti-corruption reforms, constitutional changes, whistleblower protection, public service media interference and pressure on journalists and civil society.
