Sunday, 26 October 2025
A political confrontation is widening inside Brussels after thirty-five Members of the European Parliament urged European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to request the resignation of Hungarian Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi. The demand follows allegations that Hungary’s intelligence services may have used their diplomatic representation in Brussels years ago to gather information on EU institutions, during a period that overlaps with Várhelyi’s tenure as ambassador to the European Union.
Várhelyi, who has held the health and animal welfare portfolio since 2024, denies any knowledge of recruitment or surveillance activities and has said he was unaware of wrongdoing while leading the Hungarian mission. Von der Leyen has confirmed that she discussed the matter with him and reiterated that she continues to have confidence in her commissioners unless credible evidence proves otherwise.
The letter, endorsed by parliamentarians from several political families, captures a growing sense of unease about the presence of a senior Hungarian official in the EU executive. Várhelyi has long been a close ally of Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, and his earlier role as enlargement commissioner was frequently criticised by MEPs who accused him of mirroring Budapest’s political positions. His continued place in the Commission has therefore come to symbolise the tension between European institutions and member states that challenge the bloc’s liberal principles.
Lawmakers have appealed to von der Leyen to use her authority under EU treaties to remove a commissioner if confidence is lost. Parliament itself, however, lacks any legal power to dismiss an individual member of the College and can only act collectively through a no-confidence motion against the entire Commission. Even so, the intervention has significant political impact, signalling the readiness of mainstream parties to defend institutional integrity at a moment of intensifying ideological conflict within the Union. More than sixty academics from across Europe have echoed these concerns, arguing that any connection between a serving commissioner and national intelligence operations, however indirect, would undermine the principle of independent service to the EU.
The episode arrives at a delicate time for von der Leyen, whose leadership faces increasing scrutiny ahead of a mid-term reshuffle in 2026. Her supporters say she must preserve unity among twenty-seven often divided governments, while critics contend that she has been too lenient with Budapest in exchange for political stability inside the Council. Either interpretation reflects the mounting strain between national politics and European governance.
The dispute over Várhelyi’s future also fits into a broader realignment within the EU. Prime Minister Orbán has positioned himself as a leading voice in the Patriots for Europe alliance, a grouping of nationalist and sovereigntist parties that now ranks among the Parliament’s largest forces. Slovak leader Robert Fico is in discussions to join the bloc, and Czech politician Andrej Babiš could follow if his new government is confirmed in Prague. Together, these figures promote a Europe of sovereign nations that resists deeper integration and seeks to reduce Brussels’ influence over environmental and migration policy.
In that context, pressure for Várhelyi’s removal serves both as an accountability measure and as a political statement. For pro-integration voices, it is a stand in defence of institutional independence; for the sovereigntist camp, it represents another attempt by Brussels to marginalise dissenting governments. Each side sees the case as a defining test of authority and vision for the Union’s future.
If von der Leyen were to demand Várhelyi’s resignation, such a move could reassure those calling for higher ethical standards but would risk provoking a fierce response from Hungary, which could retaliate by blocking consensus on key Council decisions. If she refrains from action, she may face accusations of weakness from Parliament and civic organisations concerned about double standards. Whichever route she chooses, the affair has exposed how fragile political trust has become within the EU’s institutions.
A parliamentary debate on the issue is expected in early November. Although any resolution would carry no binding authority, it could shape the atmosphere surrounding future appointments and heighten scrutiny of the Commission’s internal checks and balances. The outcome of this controversy will likely extend beyond one commissioner’s career, influencing how Europe defines accountability and autonomy inside its governing structures.
The allegations themselves remain under review, yet the political consequences are already visible. The dispute has deepened divisions between advocates of a stronger European executive and those pressing for a return to national primacy. What began as a question of ethics now stands as a reflection of the Union’s broader crossroads: whether it can sustain shared institutions in an era when sovereignty and integration are once again competing visions of Europe’s destiny.
Source: CIJ.World strict editorial neutrality analysis based on verified reporting from news services and official statements from the European Council, the Party of European Socialists, and the Patriots for Europe political alliance.
