{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012596899224806201, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0029069767441860465, 'mean_word_length': 4.902857142857143, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Role Models of Politics Disguised in Technique

The article analyses two decisions of the European Court of Justice issued last year against Hungary, with the aim of outlining a new trend in the Court’s caselaw, where threats to the rule of law are confronted without making express reference to it. The profiles of the two judgements that are investigated are three, and namely: the timing of the procedures, the role of discrimination in the assessment of violations of the TFEU rules on the freedom of movement of capital and services, the assessment of violations of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union alongside TFEU violations. The purpose of the article is to prove that the infringement procedure under Art. 258 TFEU can be successfully used to hinder antidemocratic drifts and illiberal trends even when a case is designed as purely technical and the rule of law is not called in, which may ultimately shield the Court itself from accusations of being too politically involved in Member States’ affairs.