The leader of the ANO party returns to the center of Czech politics with an electoral victory that marks his relaunch, but legal shadows, conflicts of interest related to the Agrofert giant, and his Eurosceptic and pro-Hungarian stance continue to undermine his credibility.
Two years after his presidential defeat, Andrej Babiš has returned to the center of Czech politics with a victory that, while clear in numbers, appears fragile in substance. His ANO party won 34.5% of the vote and 80 out of 200 seats in the parliamentary elections of October 3-4, gaining the leadership of the Assembly but without a majority of its own. The former prime minister and billionaire, already at the forefront of a decade of political dominance, is now engaged in difficult negotiations to form a government with smaller parties such as Freedom and Direct Democracy (SPD) and the Motorists’ Movement (AUTO).
President Petr Pavel, however, has set a clear limit: he will not appoint a government that compromises the country’s pro-European and pro-NATO stance. This is a clear warning to Babish, who during the election campaign openly criticized military aid to Kiev, calling it “expensive, opaque, and ineffective,” and called for greater oversight of the use of European funds earmarked for Ukraine (Reuters).
A victory with structural weaknesses
Behind the triumphalist tone of election night, analysts are calling it a “pyrotechnic victory”: ANO is the leading party, but the chances of building a stable coalition remain limited. As the Financial Times points out, the populist billionaire’s return resembles more a “tactical resurrection” than a definitive reconquest of power (FT). The weight of his political and judicial past continues to shape public perception and the willingness of potential partners to ally with him.
From Euroscepticism to the “Patriots for Europe” bloc
Babiš’s geopolitical orientation has gradually radicalized. Over the past two years, the Czech leader has moved closer to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, sharing his sovereignist agenda and skepticism toward Brussels.
In 2024, the ANO party, along with Orbán’s Fidesz and the Austrian FPÖ, co-founded the “Patriots for Europe” group in the European Parliament, a new coalition bringing together the main populist and conservative forces in Central Europe.
This alliance marks a clear departure from the European People’s Party (EPP), with which ANO had previously had ambiguous relations. The new group presents itself as an “identitarian and pragmatic” alternative to the liberal and progressive bloc in Brussels, promoting a sovereignist vision of the Union, less tied to military commitments and more focused on border control, the defense of national values, and criticism of sanctions against Russia.
It is no coincidence that Babiš, like Orbán, has expressed criticism of military support for Ukraine and called for “a diplomatic solution” to the conflict. Although not openly pro-Russian, the Czech leader maintains that “Europe must stop fighting proxy wars” and “return to defending its industrial and energy security interests.” This stance, according to The Guardian, “could weaken the pro-Ukraine front in Central Europe,” traditionally united after the Russian invasion of 2022 (The Guardian).
The Investigations and the “Čapí hnízdo” Case: The Open Wound
Andrej Babiš’s name remains inextricably linked to the long legal proceedings surrounding the “Čapí hnízdo” (Stork’s Nest) case, considered the most controversial political scandal in recent Czech history. The case concerns a farm-cum-conference center that, according to the prosecution, was temporarily separated from the Agrofert Group—the agrochemical and food giant owned by Babiš—to improperly obtain approximately €2 million in European funds intended for small and medium-sized enterprises.
In January 2023, the Prague Municipal Court acquitted Babiš of all charges, but the State Prosecutor appealed. The Court of Appeal overturned the acquittal in June 2025 and ordered a retrial, arguing that the first trial had “underestimated” evidence and committed procedural errors (Brno Daily; Times of India).
The new trial—still ongoing—leaves open a wound that is not only judicial but also political: according to Expats.cz, using the case as a “populist legitimation tool” has allowed Babiš to portray himself as the victim of a corrupt and hostile system (Expats.cz).
The Agrofert Conflict and Conflict of Interest
Alongside the legal dossier, the debate remains open regarding the conflict of interest surrounding Agrofert, the conglomerate founded by Babiš with interests in the agriculture, food, chemical, and media sectors.
During his term as Prime Minister (2017-2021), Babiš formally transferred the group’s shares into two trusts to avoid legal violations, but the European Commission has repeatedly reported that effective control had not been broken and that he continued to indirectly benefit from the profits.
In 2021, Brussels asked the Czech Republic to return part of the European funds received by Agrofert in violation of conflict of interest rules (Euractiv).
A long shadow casts over the country’s stability
Babiš’s return ushers in a new phase of uncertainty for the Czech Republic: his figure polarizes public opinion and divides the political class between those who see him as a skilled manager capable of “bringing order” and those who accuse him of seeking to concentrate economic and political power in a single person.
President Pavel has repeatedly emphasized the need to “defend the country’s international image and its European orientation” (The Guardian).
Although not yet convicted, Babiš remains under investigation and politically vulnerable. The risk is that of a suspended victory, where electoral success is not enough to guarantee governability, and pending trials continue to undermine his legitimacy.
The story of Andrej Babiš continues to embody the contradictions of European populism: an entrepreneur who became a politician by promising efficiency and transparency, but who today finds himself trapped between justice and politics, between Brussels and Prague, between the image of a reformer and that of an oligarch.
His alignment with Viktor Orbán and the “Patriots for Europe” group strengthens the sovereignist axis of Central Europe and redraws the balance within the European Parliament.
The future of the Czech Republic—and to some extent of the entire Central European region—will depend on the institutions’ ability to resist the personalization of power and maintain a firm balance between democracy, the market, and the rule of law.
