Background For centuries, the Hungarian constitution was
unwritten, based upon
customary law. There was no civil code either; lawyers worked with the
Corpus Iuris Hungarici. Among the laws that acquired constitutional force were a series of liberal statutes enacted during the
1848 Revolution; Statute XII of 1867 (enacting the
Ausgleich); and further guarantees for constitutionalism, such as Statute IV of 1869, separating the executive and the judiciary; or the post-1870 statutes regulating local self-government and state administration. Following the advent of the
Hungarian Soviet Republic, the Revolutionary Governing Council adopted a Provisional Constitution on 2 April 1919, providing for a Soviet-style political system. On 23 June, the National Assembly of Allied Councils adopted Hungary's first charter-like constitution, the Constitution of the Socialist Allied Council Republic of Hungary. However, that regime was crushed two months later and Hungary returned to its historical, unwritten pre-1918 constitution.
1949 Constitution In August 1949, with the
Hungarian Working People's Party in complete control of the country, a constitution based on the
1936 Soviet Constitution was adopted, the party's leading role enshrined in the document. Its basic features remained in place until 1989, although a number of important amendments were made, including one in 1972 that proclaimed Hungary a socialist state. While the constitution guaranteed certain fundamental rights, their scope was limited by provisions stating they had to be exercised in harmony with the interests of the socialist society. In 1989, as the
Communist regime ended, the legislature overwhelmingly approved nearly a hundred changes to the constitution that purged the document's Communist character. Hungary was thus defined as a civil democratic and constitutional republic that respected "the values of both bourgeois democracy and democratic socialism". After the opposition won free elections in the
1990 Hungarian parliamentary election, references to democratic socialism and the planned economy were dropped. Further modifications followed over the ensuing two decades, as successive plans for a new constitution did not reach fulfillment.
2011 Fundamental Law Drafting process In 2010, a new government led by
Fidesz initiated a drafting process for a new constitution. A parliamentary committee for drafting the constitution was set up, with all five parliamentary parties represented; the draft was composed on the
iPad of
József Szájer, then a
member of the European Parliament. The consultation involved questionnaires being mailed out to all citizens for their opinions; some 917,000 or 11% were returned. Provisions were then included or excluded based on consensus among respondents; for instance, a proposal to adopt voting rights for minors was shelved after citizens expressed disapproval. The following April 18, Parliament approved the constitution by the required two-thirds majority, on a 262–44 vote, with Fidesz and their
Christian Democrat coalition partners in favor and
Jobbik opposed. The
Hungarian Socialist Party and
Politics Can Be Different (LMP), citing the ruling party's unwillingness to compromise on issues and their inability to change the outcome, boycotted both the drafting process and the vote. On April 25,
President Pál Schmitt signed the document into law, and it entered into force on the first day of 2012. The enactment came halfway through Hungary's six-month
presidency of the Council of the European Union (EU). One section of the preamble criticized by some historians as well as by the head of
Hungary's Jewish community is the statement that the country lost its independence when it was
invaded and occupied by Nazi Germany in March 1944. They asserted that the provision implies the state was not responsible for the ensuing deportation of Jews to extermination camps as part of
the Holocaust and that it could affect future restitution claims. Historian
Géza Jeszenszky strongly rejected criticism of the passage, saying the loss of Hungarian sovereignty in March 1944 due to foreign invasion is simply a historical fact that should not be denied. In its support, he also mentioned Germany's direct intervention into Hungarian politics, such as the arrest of cabinet members and of anti-German politicians. Socialist leader
Attila Mesterházy denounced what he called "Fidesz's party constitution" and promised to change the constitution "on the basis of a national consensus" following the next elections.
László Sólyom, former President of Hungary and of the Constitutional Court, is a critic of limits imposed on the court and of the "common parliamentary wrangling" through which the charter was adopted. The day after
New Year's Day 2012, the government held a gala celebration at the
Hungarian State Opera House to mark the entry into force of the constitution. Outside on
Andrássy út, tens of thousands of people protested the occasion, with opponents claiming the constitution threatens democracy by removing checks and balances. Demonstrators included representatives from various civil groups and opposition parties, among them the Socialists. Fidesz MP
Gergely Gulyás, who helped write the constitution, responded to critics by saying that it improves the legal framework of life in Hungary.
International reactions The
Venice Commission and the
Hungarian Helsinki Committee expressed concern over the provision on cardinal acts; opposition parties said these could bind future governments to Fidesz' actions, but did promise to participate in the debate on the acts.
Amnesty International believes the document "violates international and European human rights standards", citing the clauses on
fetal protection, marriage and life imprisonment, and sexual orientation not being covered in the anti-discrimination clause. Left-wing and liberal members of the
European Parliament said that it fails to protect citizens' rights and reduces legislative checks and balances.
Werner Hoyer,
Germany's deputy foreign minister, expressed his country's concern as well, Additionally,
United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon suggested the government should address concerns about the constitution. In neighboring
Slovakia, which has a significant
Hungarian minority, at least three parties, including the governing
Slovak Democratic and Christian Union – Democratic Party, expressed concern about clauses that afford certain rights to ethnic Hungarians abroad, including the right to dual citizenship and the right to vote, and critics there fear that the move has expansive and nationalist objectives. Slovakia's Foreign Affairs Ministry stated that it would oppose any other country's infringement of the Slovak Constitution, its sovereignty or the rights of its citizens. In response, Foreign Minister
János Martonyi assured his Slovak counterpart that the constitution has no extraterritorial effect.
Amendments In March 2013, Parliament amended the constitution for the fourth time, on a 265-11 vote, with Fidesz, the Christian Democrats and three independents in favor and the Socialists boycotting the vote; there were also 33 abstentions. Subsequently, President
János Áder signed the amendment into law, citing his legal duty and the need to preserve national unity. The fifteen-page amendment touches on several aspects. It annuls rulings of the Constitutional Court made before the Fundamental Law went into force, while allowing their legal effects to remain. It endows the president of the Curia and the chief prosecutor with the power to initiate constitutional review of laws. While giving the Constitutional Court the power to review the constitution itself on procedural grounds, it stipulates that the court cannot annul a law passed by a two-thirds parliamentary majority. Judges and prosecutors are obliged to retire at the general retirement age, although that age is left unstated; the Curia head and the chief prosecutor are exempt. The amendment enshrines freedom of religion and allows constitutional complaints regarding the church law. It allows civil lawsuits for
hate speech targeting an individual's community, and declares that
communism is condemned. The measure requires students whose education is subsidized by the state to work in Hungary for a period after graduation or reimburse their tuition costs to the state. It allows only public media to air political advertising prior to general and
European elections. The importance of the traditional family is stressed, and authorities are empowered to ban living in certain public spaces, although homelessness is not outlawed. A prior proposal on requiring voters to register prior to elections was not included after being earlier voided by the Constitutional Court. The amendment drew criticism both within Hungary
and abroad. The Socialist floor leader called the measure an attempt to restrict the Constitutional Court's powers, and party members hung black flags from the
Hungarian Parliament Building's windows, in sign of mourning for democracy. The LMP said that the government was "dismantling constitutional values", while former prime minister
Ferenc Gyurcsány, head of the small
Democratic Coalition, also drew attention to the diminution in the court's prerogatives. while on the day of the vote, a few hundred turned out. Both
José Manuel Barroso (the
president of the European Commission) and
Thorbjørn Jagland (the
Secretary General of the Council of Europe) raised concerns about the amendment's impact on the rule of law, and prominent EU politicians, including Verhofstadt and
Martin Schulz, expressed more forceful criticism. Orbán denied that the powers of the Constitutional Court had been curtailed, challenging critics to explain just how the amendment is undemocratic, while his party said that the measure was needed in order to delineate the new constitution from the previous one. Following the amendment's adoption,
Jagland praised government efforts to address international criticism. A 2020 amendment defined the family as the union of a father who is a man and a mother who is a woman. A 2025 amendment, the 15th adopted, declares that all Hungarians are
either male or female, allows the government to strip dual nationals of their Hungarian citizenship if they are declared dangerous to the nation and enshrines the
right to use cash. The amendment was denounced by liberal critics. ==Notes==