On 21 April 2026, the Court of Justice of the European Union, sitting in plenary session, delivered a judgment destined to leave its mark: the case Commission v. Hungary (Values of the Union), C-769/22. For the first time in the history of European law, the judges in Luxembourg recognised that Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union carries autonomous and fully justiciable normative force. In plain terms: the founding values of the Union — the rule of law, democracy, respect for fundamental rights — are no longer mere statements of intent, but binding norms that Member States are obliged to respect, on pain of a formal finding of infringement before the Court itself.
The consequences of this ruling extend well beyond the Hungarian case. In the field of judicial cooperation in criminal matters, and in particular as regards the European Arrest Warrant (EAW), the landscape changes significantly — with concrete repercussions for citizens, businesses and legal practitioners involved in cross-border surrender proceedings.
What Is Article 2 TEU and Why Is This Ruling Revolutionary?
Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union sets out the values upon which the entire European architecture is founded: human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law, and respect for human rights. Until now, that provision was widely regarded as a kind of solemn preamble, devoid of real coercive force in contentious proceedings.
The judgment in Commission v. Hungary overturns this reading. The Court clarifies that a «manifest and particularly serious» violation of Article 2 TEU is, in itself, sufficient to ground an infringement action against a Member State. It is no longer necessary to demonstrate a breach of a specific secondary law provision: it suffices to prove that the State has betrayed the founding values of the Union in a systematic and incontestable manner.
The European Arrest Warrant: The Aranyosi/LM Test and Its Possible Evolution
To understand the practical implications, it is necessary to recall the mechanism governing the EAW. The Framework Decision on the European Arrest Warrant rests on the principle of mutual recognition: as a general rule, the judicial authority of one Member State must execute a warrant issued by another Member State, without re-examining the merits.
However, European case law — beginning with the Aranyosi and LM judgments — has developed a two-step test that permits refusal of surrender where there are real risks to the fundamental rights of the requested person:
- First step: it must be established that there are systemic or generalised deficiencies in the respect for fundamental rights in the issuing State.
- Second step: it must be demonstrated that the pe
