Q&A:
Hungary's controversial constitutional changes
11
March 2013
The
Hungarian parliament has approved a controversial set of amendments to the
country's new constitution.
Some
of the amendments include provisions that have previously been deemed
unconstitutional by the country's Constitutional Court.
Critics
say that they will strengthen the
power of the state, further cementing
the governing conservative Fidesz party's position in public
institutions, and damaging democracy
by removing a number of checks and balances.
Prime
Minister Viktor Orban maintains that the changes are necessary in order to
complete the work of eradicating the legacy of Communism from Hungary. The
constitution, enacted in January 2012, replaced one drafted in 1989, at a time
when the country was emerging from 40 years of Communist rule.
What
are the main provisions contained in the amendments?
One
provision limits the power of the Constitutional Court and removes its right
to strike out any laws that have already been enshrined in the constitution.
Another lowers the retirement age for judges - a measure that critics say is
designed to weed out non-pliable magistrates.
In
the field of the media, there is an article restricting election campaigning
to state media alone. Critics say that this will curb freedom of
expression.
Several
other provisions have been criticised as curtailing civil liberties. These
include a requirement for students who have received state grants to stay and
work in Hungary for a certain period of time after graduating, or pay back the
cost of their tuition to the state.
Another
article says that preference should be given to traditional (ie
heterosexual) family relationships, and says that marriage and the
parent-child relationship form the basis of the traditional family.
Why
was the government able to introduce such sweeping changes?
In
the 2010 election, a conservative coalition consisting of Mr Orban's
Fidesz party and the Christian Democratic People's Party won two-thirds
of the seats in parliament, and this powerful majority has made it possible
for the governing parties to push through several pieces of controversial
legislation.
Where
have the main objections come from?
European
institutions and the US government have all expressed concern over the changes,
as have human rights organisations such as Amnesty International.
Reacting
to the vote on Monday, European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said
the adopted amendments "raise concerns with respect to the principle of
the rule of law, EU law and Council of Europe standards" and the
Commission would "make a detailed assessment" and act accordingly.
The
European institution responsible for defending human rights, the Council of
Europe, had urged Hungary to postpone the vote.
The
US state department said that the changes threaten to undermine democratic
governance in the country.
What
about domestic opposition to the changes?
The
main opposition Socialist Party boycotted the vote. The party is still
struggling to recover from its devastating defeat in the 2010 election.
A
protest by thousands of people in Budapest over the weekend against the
constitutional amendments was organised by human rights groups.
Former
President Laszlo Solyom - who helped to draft the 1989 constitution and served
as the head of the Hungarian Constitutional Court from 1990 to 1998 - said in
an open letter to the press on the day of the vote that the only way to stop
the changes becoming irrevocable would be for President Janos Ader to refuse to
sign the constitutional amendments into law.
Over
the weekend the independent news website Origo ran an article headlined
"Don't sign it, Janos!" and said anti-amendment demonstrations would
continue outside his residence.
How
has the government responded to the objections?
In
a written response to Mr Barroso's telephone call, Mr Orban said that Hungary
was "fully committed" to European standards. On Monday, Mr Barroso
repeated that the Commission expects the Hungarian authorities to "engage
in bilateral contacts with the European institutions in order to address any
concerns raised as to the compatibility of these amendments with European
principles and EU law."
And
Gergely Gulyas, the deputy leader of the Fidesz parliamentary group, told the
right-wing daily Magyar Nemzet that the government saw no reason to put off the
vote despite "domestic and international kerfuffle".
"It's
natural for the governing majority to make use of the authority it received in
democratic elections," he said.
