Hungarian transparency under threat

Hungarian transparency under threat

Last week Hungarian President János Áder sent back a controversial draft law to Parliament. The amendment to the Freedom of Information law would have restricted access to public information. If passed, it would be much harder for Hungarians to understand government actions and hold public officials to account.

The amendment was introduced by MPs of ruling political party Fidesz and pushed through the parliament in less than 48 hours. It will now undergo further consideration in the Parliament.   

In early May the proposed amendment caused and several other civil society organisations to quit an anti-corruption group they had formed with the government. Still, even though Áder did not sign the draft, Hungary is dangerously close to creating a new secrecy law.

The amendment is the first step down a slippery slope, at the bottom of which is full state control of public information."

- Miklós Ligeti, Legal Director TI Hungary

Vetoing the law was the minimum Áder could do, says Transparency International Hungary. Had he been brave enough he would have asked for a ruling from the Constitutional Court, who would have had many grounds to find the amending law unconstitutional. The changes proposed would severely obstruct access to information of public interest, with vague and obscure terms opening the door to arbitrary and restrictive interpretations.

Law would limit freedom of information

the amount of data citizens can access. It does so by saying only state bodies are allowed to collect enough data to carry out large audits. It closes the door for extended and real access to, and the processing of, large amounts of government data by individuals and non-governmental groups like civil society organisations or the media.

Since the amendment uses general terms, authorities can freely interpret it, giving them a lot of leeway to reject requests for the disclosure of information as “abusive” or “excessive” requests.

Variety of accessible information is reduced

The amendment also limits the scope of Hungary’s current Freedom of Information law. If the changes go through, it will no longer be the umbrella for a range of different laws, with different codes and regulations on data and information.

As a result, an appeal using the law of freedom information as the means for an information request may no longer be enough if a Hungarian wants to obtain information on everything from court cases, to decisions of public bodies, or personal information about public officials. The variety of accessible information is widely curtailed.

Even worse, while the Freedom of Information law makes it possible to dispute a refused request for public information, it is far from clear what one can do if a request for information outside this law is denied again.

These limitations boil down to the slow suffocation of access to information in Hungary. When access to information is lacking, it makes it easier for officials to get away with corrupt acts and hide the truth. The limitations proposed by the Hungarian government directly endanger the possibility to audit, review and therefore control public offices as designated under the law.

Cigarette controversy provoke amendment

In addition, the amendment applies to both future and ongoing cases. That means the Hungarian government can also intervene in information requests that are already in process. It is no surprise, therefore, that the Hungarian Parliament decided on constituting the draft law after civil society groups had asked the government to .

1,417
The number of applications for selling tobacco not recognized during the tender that will, as of July 2013, become a state monopoly.

In Hungary the government maintains a monopoly on the retail of tobacco and can therefore grant concessions to run tobacco shops. The criteria for judging the bids are kept secret as well as the names of applicants and the names of those who evaluate the bids.

Critics say the secrecy over the tobacco retail makes it possible for the government led by Fidesz to favour people willing to help the party maintain its position at next years’ parliamentary elections.

Where to go now

Tobacco retail licenses aside, the impact of the amendment is much wider, covering all public bodies, and threatens transparency across the government.

In the case of the access to information, other European countries do better than Hungary when it comes to having an independent oversight body as well as providing full publication of income and asset disclosures.

Hungary used to have an independent Freedom of Information Ombudsman. But the prime-minister replaced him by the president of the Hungarian Data Protection and Freedom of Information Authority. In name this protector of the Hungarian Freedom of Information is still independent. But unlike his predecessor he is an authority and therefore part of the executive. This was questioned by the European Commission which then litigated Hungary before the Luxembourg Court (for breach of EU law).

For more about the work of Transparency International Hungary click

Across Europe Transparency International has uncovered barriers to accessing public information. Problems with access to information rules include excessive fees and long delays, lack of public awareness of right to information, lack of independent oversight body, extensive exceptions regarding business and company secretes and poor implementation by local authorities. We have made the following recommendations on access to information:
  • Adopt a proactive disclosure approach, making information ‘public by default’ in an easily accessible and understandable electronic format.
  • Information should be free of charge or with reasonable fees.
  • Stipulate clear and reasonable time limits for how long public bodies can review appeals against refusals for access to information.

 

For any press enquiries please contact [email protected]

Solicitude

Support Transparency International

Strengthening rule of law along the cocaine route

Transparency International has teamed up with the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and INTERPOL, to implement the CRIMJUST Project, funded by the European Union. The project aims to strengthen criminal investigation and criminal justice cooperation along the cocaine route in Latin America, the Caribbean and West Africa.

Political asylum for ex-presidents: an easy way to impunity?

This year we celebrate the 70th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration. Yet while we celebrate the universality of human rights, at times powerful individuals try to abuse the principles that underpin the international human rights framework. Two recent cases of two ex-presidents who have applied for political asylum to evade justice, and two countries who handled these requests in very different ways, highlight some of these abuses.

International Anti-Corruption Day 2018: The power of people’s pressure

Across the world, Transparency International chapters work hard to help the public become involved and engaged in the fight against corruption.

La Justicia española debe investigar el lavado de imagen de Azerbaiyán en Europa

Tres políticos españoles —Pedro Agramunt, Agustín Conde Bajén y Jordi Xuclá— se encuentran entre los delegados ante la Asamblea Parlamentaria del Consejo de Europa (APCE) sobre los que pesan sospechas de haberse beneficiado con la maniobra del “Laundromat”.

Clean up Spain – Justice for Azerbaijan’s reputation laundering in Europe

In Azerbaijan, critical voices are routinely suppressed. Meanwhile in Europe, politicians suspected of helping whitewash Azerbaijan’s record on human rights enjoy impunity. Join our campaign to urge authorities in Spain to investigate.

Everything you need to know about the 18th International Anti-Corruption Conference (#18IACC)

The #18IACC will take place from 22-24 October in Copenhagen, Denmark under the theme Together for Development, Peace and Security: Now is the Time to Act. Get the latest info and updates here!

Risky business: Europe’s golden visa programmes

Are EU Member States accepting too much risk in their investor migration schemes?

Why rather

Follow us on Why rather