DUBEN 2015 EU VS. ORBÁN – FIGHTING FOR DEMOCRACY WITHIN THE EU Zuzana Stuchlíková “European values” as defined in Article 2 of the TEU) – and how useful or applicable in practice Introduction those tools are. European Union is often praised for its normative The first part of this text will briefly introduce the soft power and transformation capacity. Seen as a situation in Hungary after 2010. The second part major democracy promoter in its neighbourhood consequently introduces and analyses various tools (and consequently in the world), democratic nature already used by the EU institutions. The third part of its member states was for a long time almost shortly describes provisions applied in the past and taken for granted. The first real concerns appeared the fourth part introduces proposals for improving after the preparations for the Eastern enlargement the convergence within the member states in the started. But even then, the idea was that the EU future. The last part aims to identify the main membership will help to consolidate new reasons why the current EU activities do not seem to democracies of former communist countries. Now, be very successful in the case of Hungary. more than 10 years after, the case of Hungary shows that the EU membership is not a panacea and the so- called “Copenhagen dilemma” is again on the table. Orbán’s Hungary After fulfilling all the pre-accession conditions in the field of democracy, human rights and rule of law, Hungarian parliamentary election in 2010 brought results that are not seen very often in there is very little pushing the new members to country with proportional electoral system. FIDESZ, comply with those principles. Hungary seems to be a conservative party with nationalist rhetoric, won the prime example of this. The Hungarian Prime Minister Orbán has, since his accession to power in the election by a large margin and together with 2010, introduced many controversial laws and in his Christian Democratic People's Party suddenly held two-thirds majority in country‟s National Assembly. speeches, he speaks about Hungary‟s journey towards illiberal democracy. Viktor Orbán‟s overwhelming success was a result of many aspects, but probably mainly a fatigue of How can the EU address such developments in one eight years under the Socialist Party and austerity of its member states? This paper will try to analyse provisions demanded by the EU, IMF and the World which options and tools does the EU have to Bank after 2008, when Hungary was the first intervene in its member states for the sake of European country that faced bankruptcy and needed democracy and rule of law (or more broadly 1 APRIL 2015 a bail out. 1 Two years later, the overall economic Commission.4 It introduced various arrangements situation in the country was still far from the pre- that disturb the mechanism of checks and balances crisis level, social tensions remained largely in democratic societies. Most importantly, it unaddressed and the mood in the society was very restricted the powers of the Constitutional Court in much against any external forces.2 tax and budgetary matters (in a direct reaction to the court‟s disapproval of constitutional provision With a constitutional majority, new Prime allowing for retroactive taxation). New Fundamental Minister Orbán decided to use his position to push law also lowered the retirement age for judges, from through a new Fundamental law, how the country‟s 70 to 62, which was generally seen as an attempt to constitution is called. That fact itself would probably appoint new judges, chosen and approved by the not be seen as controversial in much of Europe. But new administration. Status of various minorities and it was the pace, lack of consultation with the 5 churches was also modified. The development opposition and nature of laws included that caused clearly jeopardized democracy in the country and widespread concerns about the state of Hungarian brought restrictions to the independence of democracy. institutions, freedom of speech, as well as minority Already at the beginning of 2011, Hungarian rights among others. new media law raised eyebrows of European European politicians were alarmed, but in Hungary, politicians. Law that came into force on 1 January Orbán‟s position remained largely uncontested, 2011 regulated content of all media published in which was proved again when FIDESZ comfortably Hungary, created new media control body where won the parliamentary elections in April 2014. Even every media producer had to be registered in order to though Orbán‟s support decreased compared with be allowed to continue to work. The law also 2010, he still managed to get 44% of votes and imposed fines for those who would publish secure tight constitutional majority. “imbalanced” content or content going “against public interest” and removed legal protection against In the autumn of 2014, attention of Europe turned to the disclosure of journalists' sources etc. 3 Hungary again. A proposal for the internet taxation brought Hungarians to the streets against Orbán for The constitutional law came into practice on 1 the first time since his accession to power in 2010. January 2012 and has been amended four times As a result, the proposal was withdrawn and it seems since. The fourth amendment from 2013 was seen as especially harmful to basic principles of human rights and rule of law, as stated also by the Venice 4 Venice Commission, or officially The European Commission for Democracy through Law, is the Council 1 Zoltán Pogátsa, „Understanding Hungary: The Social of Europe's advisory body on constitutional matters. Prerequisites of Political Democracy“, Visegrad Revue (8. http://www.venice.coe.int/WebForms/pages/?p=01_Prese 4. 2014), http://visegradrevue.eu/?p=2465 (downloaded ntation. 30. 11. 2014). 5 „Opinion on the Fourth Amendment to the Fundamental 2 Eszter Zalán, „The EU and Hungary: Locked in a Law of Hungary“, Venice Commission opinion 720/2013 Tango“, Visegrad Revue (26. 4. 2012), (17. 6. 2013), http://visegradrevue.eu/?p=644 (downloaded 30. 11. http://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.as 2014). px?pdffile=CDL-AD%282013%29012-e (downloaded 3. 3 „Hungary: Media Law Endangers Press Freedom“, 12. 2014); Nóra Novoszádek, „Hungary: The Constitution Human Rights Watch news section (7. 1. 2011), is not a Toy“, Visegrad Revue (26. 6. 2013), http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/01/07/hungary-media- http://visegradrevue.eu/?p=1678 (downloaded 12. 12. law-endangers-press-freedom (downloaded 5. 12. 2014) 2014). 2 APRIL 2015 that Orbán has found the limits of his power on the the tools and possible reactions that were – or could domestic scene.6 be - used on the EU level. Orbán’s rhetoric has been also far from a Declaration of concern standard European leader. He has repeatedly stated In politics and on the EU level especially, that his goal is to build “illiberal democracy” in before any action is taken, many words are said and Hungary, internationally competitive state based on statements issued. And while those words may not national foundations and not necessarily following have direct consequences, they identify the problem, the rules of representative democracy. He cited cumulate attention and create initial pressure on the Russia, Turkey and China as examples he looks up to party in question. On the EU level, it has been and added that “(...)European Union membership mainly the European Parliament and European (does not) precludes us from building an illiberal Commission that played a role from the very 7 new state based on national foundations”. beginning. When the media law was introduced in Hungary, it was President of the Commission José Euro scepticism is a large part of Orbán’s Manuel Barroso and the European commissioner success. After years of austerity measures and responsible for media, Neelie Kroes, who met with conditionality, Hungarian public seems to respond Orbán in January 2011 and talked about the new positively to right-wing politicians, such as the arrangement.9 In the following years, as the President of the Hungarian Parliament, László Fundamental law was put into practice, number of Kövér, who compared the EU to the Soviet Union letters and statements from Vice-President for and called on Brussels to stop dictating the country Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship, how to run its internal affairs. 8 Viviane Reding, President Barrosso and other Commissioners, whose agenda was touched, increased. Barrosso also surprised many when he Possible reactions on the EU level said in a speech to the European Parliament that EU law must be respected not only in letter, but in spirit Such a development of course cannot go as well. It was the first time a Commission unnoticed within the European Union. The EU representative emphasized the importance of the representatives and European politicians expressed 10 spirit of the law. their concerns from the very beginning of Orbán‟s time in power. The following chapter will examine The European Parliament, even though never united in its opinion on FIDESZ, as will be further discussed later, also issued various reports and statements. The first resolution, on media law in 6 „Hungary Internet tax: A bit of Protest“, The Economist Hungary, was issued on 10 March 2011. In 2013, (30. 10. 2014), following the introduction of the new constitution, http://www.economist.com/blogs/easternapproaches/2014 the EP went even further when on July 3 it passed a /10/hungarys-internet-tax (downloaded 14. 12. 2014). resolution which stated that Hungary breached the 7 Honor Mahony, „Orbán wants to build 'illiberal state“, values as defined in the Article 2. The resolution EU Observer (28. 7. 2014), was based on a report by Green MEP Rui Tavares http://euobserver.com/political/125128 (downloaded 14.