He said he also plans to consult with Czech Foreign Minister Jakub Kulhanek.
The prime minister added that Czechia is a liberal country supporting the rights of sexual minorities and that he has discussed the issue with Luxembourg Prime Minister Xavier Bettel, the only openly gay leader of an EU country. “It needs to be explained thoroughly… I can’t judge it, we agreed that we would have it explained in the V4 to be sure that the interpretations are correct,” Babis told reporters. The leaders were due to meet at a pre-summit coordination meeting of the Visegrad Four (V4) group. Prime Minister Andrej Babis said on Thursday morning, as he arrived in Brussels ahead of the summit, that he wants to discuss the issue with Orban. The Czech government office said that, frankly, they did not know why there was no Czech signature. Local media reported that Czech representatives in Brussels told them that the Belgian initiative went through the government in Prague. The reason for the Czech refusal to sign is unclear – even, it appears, to the government itself. Notably, all the largest members – such as Germany, France, Italy and Spain – were among the 17 signatories, though Hungary’s Central European neighbours – Czechia, Poland and Slovakia – all declined to sign it.
Belgium, the main driver behind the letter, approached all 27 member states asking them to put their name to the letter.
Upping the ante, more than half of EU member states signed a joint declaration voicing “grave concerns” over the law and calling for the Commission to act over this “flagrant form of discrimination”. On Thursday, EU commissioners Thierry Breton and Didier Reynders claimed the bill would violate the bloc’s media and tech laws, as it “unjustifiably” limits the television and online content currently regulated in the EU under the Audiovisual Media Services Directive and the e-Commerce Directive. He branded the statement by von der Leyen as “shameful because it is based on untrue allegations”. For his part, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban argues the law “does not contain any discriminatory elements”, because it is only designed to protect the rights of children, guarantee the rights of parents, and does not apply to the sexual orientation rights of those over 18 years of age.