Is It Even Legal? EU Commission to Ban All Russian Energy Imports By End of 2027

The European Commission has proposed an unprecedented “phase-out” of all remaining Russian fossil fuels from the European market, and it’s prepared to force countries to go along, whether their economies can afford it or not.

According to a press release published on Tuesday, June 17th, the new EU legislation would prohibit natural gas imports under new contracts from January 1st, 2026, while member states will be forced to terminate existing short-term contracts six months later, and long-term contracts by the end of 2027.

Landlocked countries would also have the option to keep importing pipeline gas under both short and long-term contracts until December 2027, ‘graciously’ giving them time to build up the necessary infrastructure to replace Russian gas with much more expensive seaborne alternatives via their European neighbors.

As for those who still import Russian oil as well, they’d be required to draft and submit their personalized plans to phase out oil deliveries by the end of 2027 as well. New regulations will also be put in place requiring energy companies to prove the origin of their imports, while there are options to also include a ban on Russian nuclear fuel in the scope of the law.

The reason why the Commission is putting the ban forward as a new “trade and energy” legislation and not as another sanctions package is to bypass national vetoes, practically forcing reluctant land-locked countries in Central Europe whose economies and energy security will be devastated by the move.

Sanctions fall under ‘foreign policy’ and therefore require the unanimous consent of all 27 EU member states. Introducing a new law branded as ‘trade’ policy that affects the integrity of the single market, however, needs only a qualified majority—meaning 15 countries representing 65% of the EU population are enough to pass it.

Sacrificing member states

The circumvention of the veto will primarily affect Hungary and Slovakia, whose geographical position makes them over-reliant on Russian pipeline oil and gas deliveries. The alternative is to buy Western—mainly American and Norwegian—LNG via Croatian terminals, for as much as four times the price.

For the first time since the start of the war, Russian LNG (liquified natural gas) will also be banned, affecting Western European countries. Over 90% of Russian LNG coming to Europe is bought by only three countries (Spain, France, and Belgium), who’ve been importing record amounts since the beginning of the war—worth over €30 billion—and massively profiting by reselling it to other European countries, including those who gave up Russian pipeline gas.

This time, however, even these large LNG importers are backing the ban, meaning the Central European countries whose economies would suffer greatly under the forced transition don’t have enough allies left to block the legislation.

Despite the EU Commission arguing that the ban is needed to “diversify” Europe’s energy supply and boost its “energy independence and competitiveness,” it will have the exact opposite effect in Central Europe. Instead of independence, it would render these countries utterly dependent on the monopoly of a single LNG route, deeply undermining their energy security.

Is it even legal?

What’s more, the move represents a serious violation of the sovereignty of member states, as guaranteed by the EU’s foundational treaties, argued Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó. “Under EU treaties, energy policy remains a national competence,” he wrote on X. “No institution has the right to dictate what energy source we use, in what quantity, from whom, or when.”

Szijjártó was referring to Art.194 of the TFEU, which says that EU measures “shall not affect a Member State’s right to determine the conditions for exploiting its energy resources, its choice between different energy sources and the general structure of its energy supply.” The Council may derogate from this rule, but only within a unanimously approved “special legislative procedure,” the article adds.

In other words, the Commission cannot legally mandate any country to give up Russian energy, nor can it bypass national vetoes when imposing such a ban, yet it’s still doing it by exploiting loopholes. Framing it as defending Europe’s “supply chain resilience” from Russian extortion in the context of the war, or the need to prevent “distorting the common market,” the Commission is able to ignore member states’ fundamental rights with impunity, even if it shouldn’t.

That’s why on Monday, Hungary and Slovakia vetoed a joint ministerial resolution on a preliminary endorsement of the plan, but that will hardly make any difference in the long run. Once the legislation is submitted for Council approval under the qualified majority rule, there’s no more veto left to raise.