Skip to content

The European Commission should be more intransigent to stop systemic corruption in Hungary – joint analysis by Hungarian NGOs on the anticorruption package of the Hungarian government

The European Commission should be more intransigent to stop systemic corruption in Hungary – joint analysis by Hungarian NGOs on the anticorruption package of the Hungarian government

Forced by the economic need to access EU-funding, Hungary’s government launched perhaps the most significant anticorruption package of the last decade. As revealed by the European Commission in its proposal for an implementing decision by the Council, the government of Hungary offered to implement 17 remedial measures in order to have the Conditionality Mechanism closed. Now three NGOs, Hungarian Helsinki Comittee, K-Monitor and Transparency International Hungary evaluated the anticorruption package of the Hungarian government jointly.

The remedial measures profoundly differ in consistency and feasibility, and they require a different set of tools to be implemented.

The Commission rated the remedial measures upon the timeframe of implementation, and concluded in an explanatory memorandum annexed to the proposal for an implementing decision by the Council that four of the measures require a longer implementation period, while the remaining 13 measures can be achieved by the adoption of immediate key implementing steps. The Hungarian government pledged to make these key implementation steps until 19 November 2022.

To this end, the Hungarian government has so far put forward legislative drafts or has amended the existing regulatory framework in numerous terrains including, inter alia public consultation in law-making, conflict of interest regulations, asset declarations, freedom of information, private prosecution in corruption related offences, and, most prominently, the setting up of Hungary’s new Integrity Authority and the new Anti-corruption Task Force.

The co-signers of the present assessment highlighted in a joint evaluation published in October 2022 that as part of this effort, the Hungarian government introduced a series of often hastily designed regulations to the Parliament without any prior consultations with civil society or external experts. However, with the inclusion of non-governmental stakeholders the government could have demonstrated its readiness to refrain from unilateral decision-making.

In addition, CSOs have criticised the government for the proposition of measures with anticipatedly humble impact on Hungary’s anticorruption and rule of law performance. K-Monitor highlighted in a recent post a number of fields and corruption related problems that remain unaddressed, while the Hungarian Helsinki Committee formulated a set of recommendations necessary to safeguard the independence of the judiciary – a fundamental condition for making the above mentioned reforms work.

Transparency International Hungary concluded in a recent blogpost that this anticorruption package, if adopted in its current format, is a missed opportunity. In the present paper, we intend to draw attention to the fact that the measures devised in an attempt to convince European Union decisionmakers about the Hungarian government’s determination to end intentional wrongdoing not only fall short of several of the 17 proposed remedial measures but fail to encompass the complexity of government malpractice in Hungary. Besides, we aim to provide input into the Council’s decision-making process with a view to remedying to a certain extent the omission of the consultation phase and allow for information from the ground to make its way into the assessment of Hungary’s commitments and their implementation so far.

Since the publication of our previous assessment, besides having adopted most of the legislative drafts, the Hungarian government has proposed new regulations, too. The regulatory changes, whether proposed or adopted, allegedly serve either to strengthen the capacities and the tools of the state to fight high level corruption and the misuse of EU funds or to improve the conditions for civil society and media to exercise oversight regarding public spending. Unfortunately, the proposed measures are unfit to fully meet these aims, as key control authorities of the state remain untouched, while newly introduced institutions and newly designed procedures rely on their cooperation.

It is equally unfortunate that measures devised to increase the level of transparency of public spending or expand the legal toolset of watchdogs are moderately ambitious. In our joint evaluation we analyse the most important loopholes of the solutions offered by the Hungarian government and present a succinct summary of our key recommendations.

Before providing the substantive analysis, it is necessary to point out the problems of the procedure itself which the Hungarian government has been conducting with a view to complying with the 17 commitments. In addition to the total lack of public consultations with the relevant stakeholders, the legislative process has been hectic and characterised by a concerning absence of transparency and foreseeability.

To read the full analysis, please check the two documents attached to this article.

Related pages

No data was found
×