Brussels, 13-06-2019 EPP Evaluation Committee Mr. Wolfgang Schüssel, Mr. Herman Van Rompuy; Mr. Hans-Gert Pöttering President of the EPP Mr. Joseph Daul Dear Mr. President, Dear Committee-members, I was surprised when this morning the Hungarian media reported about Mr Orbán’s letter to you, as a member of the “group of wise men” tasked with investigating the situation of democracy and the rule of law in Hungary. My surprise was fuelled by Fidesz’s apparent unwillingness to engage in an open and meaningful dialogue during the campaign period, a virtue Orbán cynically refers to in his new letter. Allow me to present you with an alternative version of Mr Orbán’s letter, a document that many people in Hungary will feel is closer to reality that the one written by the Prime Minister. Kind regards, MEP István Ujhelyi Hungarian Member of the European Parliament (MSZP) 1. Is Fidesz prepared to cease campaigning against European institutions, as has happened in the past, refrain from putting the EPP in a negative light and from personally attacking the EPP leadership in speeches and articles? Fidesz’s communication strategy regarding the EU - and the EPP - is simple. Whenever an EU institution, EU or EPP official dares to criticize the Hungarian government, a full-scale smear campaign is launched against that institution or person. When Manfred Weber phrased criticism, journalists from Fidesz’s media conglomerate were ordered to publish articles about Mr Weber, calling him a “wretched coward”, or a “mucous thing who wants to destroy what we call family”. Zsolt Bayer, a founder of Fidesz, even suggested that Mr Weber should, quite simply, “go f*ck himself”. Viktor Orbán himself compared Brussels to communist-era Moscow several times. In speeches he suggests that George Soros has bought dozens of EU figures - including Juncker - who “dance to his tune” whenever Soros so wishes. You might remember the “Let’s stop Brussels” campaign from 2017, with hundreds of anti-EU billboards and a “national consultation” with questions tailored to spread lies about the EU’s functioning. In 2019 before the EU elections, a similar billboard campaign was launched, targeting Juncker himself. There is no guarantee that Fidesz will not initiate another hate-campaign if such an action would be in their political interest. The acceptance of the EU is high among Hungarians despite Fidesz’s policy-making, not because of it. 2. Please explain what you mean by the expression “illiberal state”. Viktor Orbán betrays a disappointing intellectual inferiority when arguing that liberal democracy is an oxymoron. Democracy is simply non-existent without the universally accepted liberal values of equality or human rights. The fact that Fidesz interprets liberalism in an arbitrary way that fits their narrow-minded political agenda is as unfortunate as it is dangerous for the whole of Europe. If we put Orbán’s “illiberal democracy” speech in its original context, it is rather clear what he meant. Viktor Orbán said in 2014 that “a trending topic in thinking is understanding systems that are not Western, not liberal, not liberal democracies, maybe not even democracies, and yet making nations successful. Today, the stars of international analyses are Singapore, China, India, Turkey, Russia. I believe that our political community rightly anticipated this challenge. And if we think back on what we did in the last four years, and what we are going to do in the following four years, then it really can be interpreted from this angle.” On this basis he later explained that the “Hungarian nation is not a simple sum of individuals, but a community that needs to be organized, strengthened and developed, and in this sense, the new state that we are building is an illiberal state, a non-liberal state.” 3. When you say that you will not support the EPP if it forms a ‘pro-migration’ coalition at the European level, which other majority formations do you have in mind otherwise? Orbán’s evasive answer about migration suggests he is cowardly hiding behind his favourite topic trying to forget about his original plan to form a large Eurosceptic and anti-migration group in the European Parliament. Balázs Hidvéghi, newly elected MEP and Fidesz’s former spokesperson declared that leaders of the EU should reflect the views of Salvini, while Viktor Orbán was the main supporter of what he called the “Austrian-model” - namely, allying with the extreme-right. Before the EU elections, Fidesz’s media prepared supporters for quitting the EPP and joining the far-right, which was the real plan until anti-EU forces scored lower that expected on May 26. 4. Is Fidesz prepared to adopt and implement decisions of European institutions that have been passed lawfully, in particular to comply with judgments of the European Court of Justice? On the 6th of September 2017, the European Court of Justice ruled that the EU’s decision regarding “refugee quotas” is lawful and must be applied by all member states. Prominent member of the Fidesz-government reacted hysterically to this decision. Péter Szijjártó, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade said that “politics raped European law and European values.” László Trócsányi, newly elected MEP and Minister of Justice added: “we will fight in the future as well, the real battle is just starting now”. The Hungarian government declared that they would not comply with the decision of the European Court of Justice. 5. How is the independence of ordinary jurisdiction, the Administrative Court and the Constitutional Court guaranteed - as questioned in the opinions by the Venice Commission? (Opinion 943/2018 of 19 March 2018 and Opinion 720/2013 of 17 June 2013). Fidesz intended to establish a new system of administrative courts, which would have severely undermined judicial independence, since the government would have had oversight of the institution, with the Orbán-appointed justice minister in control of appointing judicial positions and promotion of judges. Administrative courts would have had jurisdiction over cases relating to “public administration,” including politically sensitive matters like electoral law, corruption, state refusals over data requests of public interest, and the right to protest. The government already tried to push through a similar package in 2012 and 2016, this time they only backed down after their position became rather unstable within the EPP. There is no guarantee that Fidesz will not attempt the establishment of administrative courts again, once they re-solidify their status in the EPP. And one another fact I need to point out: the powerful - and unquestionably not independent - president of the National Office of the Judiciary (OBH) is the wife of MEP József Szájer. 6. In what way is the freedom of expression and the freedom of association, as referred to in Article 10/11 of the EHCR, in view of the concerns expressed by the Venice Commission in Opinion 720/2013 of 17 March 2013 and 919/2018 of 25 June 2018, ensured, in particular regarding the work of NGOs, the necessary possibility for consultation during asylum procedures as well as the intended criminal penalties? The fact is that government-critical NGOs - irrespective whether they are active in the field of migration - are under constant threat in Hungary. A new legislation, dubbed as the “Stop Soros” bill was introduced that imposes a 25% tax on foreign donations to NGOs, while such NGOs must declare their foreign-funded status after registering with relevant authorities as well. Zoltán Kovács, a spokesperson-turned-state secretary said that “loopholes that still exist in the legal system that allow organisations not entitled to do so … to meddle in political decision- making should be closed”. An obvious admission of the fact that the government merely intends to intimidate those NGOs that raise criticism regarding Orbán’s illiberal regime. 7. How do you plan to clarify the pending legal issues regarding the Central European University CEU in order to guarantee the freedom of expression, science, and education? CEU was forced out of Hungary by the Hungarian government. This is a fact that anyone can double-check with a five-minute online research. In a cynical chain of attacks and harassment, Fidesz introduced administrative burdens and tailor-made legislation that targeted the CEU - a grave violation of the freedom of science and education. Orbán loathes anything that operates independently form the government, which is why today the Hungarian Academy of Science (MTA) is under threat as the government aims to access the funds it receives from the EU by taking away its research institutions. Their goal is to acquire control over the institution’s funds while taking over many of its valuable properties as well. 8. How is the freedom of religion safeguarded in Hungary, especially when referring again to the Opinion of the Venice Commission 720/2013 of 17.06.2013, which criticizes the lack of specific criteria for recognition and the lack of effective remedies against negative decisions; furthermore this Opinion expresses the concern that, on the context of the constitutional provision on the “dignity of the Hungarian nation”, clear conflicts of interpretation are to be expected? The Orbán-government grants legal status to churches as if it was a grace or reward from the state - which violates the principle of separation of church and state. 9. How will you significantly improve the fight against corruption - given the CPI Index 2018 by Transparency International, where Hungary ranks 64th (out of the EU Member States, only Greece has a worse ranking), OLAF’s complaints about inadequate public procurement and politically motivated assignments of contracts or the corruption in relation with the independence of the judiciary? During the past 9 years of Orbán-governments, Hungary has been scoring lower and lower on every corruption ranking, not only TI’s.