The aim of this thesis is to find an explanation of the obstacles to deploying Article 7 TEU measures as we see it today. This explanation will be sought in the events in this field starting from the formation of the provision, all the way up to this writing moment. The explanation will be searched for by using the research question: What in the process offorming and amending Article 7 TEU can explain the hesitancy and hardship to deploy the article today? Four hypotheses for explanations are identified; 1) Article 7 TEU is a political rather than legal provision, and is thus infiltrated with political subjectiveness rather than legal objective- ness, 2) lessons from the Haider affair have caused hesitancy, 3) adding intermediate steps and alternative procedures have weakened the nature of the provision, and 4) the nuclear notion has falsely created hesitancy to take action and oblivion of the softer mechanisms of the provision. This study concludes, that to fully understand the Article 7 TEU struggles as of today, both political implications, intermediate steps, alternative mechanisms and lessons from the Haider affair has to be taken into account. This com- plexity does then confirm the sufficiency of the explanation: Many factors has played a role in forming the hesitancy and hardship to deploy Article 7 TEU, but the intergovernmental and political nature of the provision explains why it still have not been fully implemented. This is although the scope and appli- cation of the provision fully fits the problems of democratic backsliding, that permeates some of the member states of the EU.