The EU disburses a tranche of 3.2 billion euros to Ukraine for acquisitions in the field of anti-aircraft defense

Hungary has blocked, for the third time, the approval of the screening on clusters 2 and 3 in the accession negotiations of Ukraine and Moldova, maintaining the veto due to dissatisfaction related to the protection of national minorities in Ukraine. Hungary’s opposition to Ukraine also affects Moldova, as both accession processes are coupled.

A UE official told IPN that at the meeting on September 8, the working group for enlargement and countries in the process of accession negotiations within the EU Council (COELA) failed to reach a consensus for the approval of the screening on clusters 2 and 3.

The cited source further specified that, during the meeting, the Hungarian delegation again made the lifting of the veto conditional on Ukraine making progress in implementing the bilateral agreement on the protection of national minorities. COELA is expected to revisit the subject at one of the upcoming meetings.

This is the third attempt to approve the screening results that Budapest is blocking, after initially voting against it on July 22 and September 1. So far, the European Union has only opened clusters 1 and 6, “Fundamental values” and “External relations”, in the negotiation process with Moldova and Ukraine.

In the first half of the current year, the number of cases pending for over two years has decreased by 40%, and in the case of causes with an examination duration of more than three years, the decrease was 27%. The data is found in a report on reducing backlogs in judicial courts, presented at the meeting of the Superior Council of Magistracy, reports IPN.

In October 2025, the CSM established a mechanism to monitor the duration of case examinations, with the aim of reducing the number of files that have been in court for a long time. Based on this, the presidents of the courts were required to develop internal plans and prioritize cases that have been under examination for over two years, especially those exceeding three years.

All judicial instances have thus presented such plans, setting objectives and measures depending on the volume of cases. The results of their application are reported to the CSM every six months.

According to the CSM, in line with the benchmarks of the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice, cases whose examination exceeds 24 months are considered to have an excessive duration and require increased attention from the judicial system.