On the Inforádio show Arena on Monday, Minister of Public Administration and Justice Tibor Navracsics said that the new Fundamental Law is different from the constitution of 1989, but it is not worse. He added that in the course of introducing new constitutions in other countries it was common for there to be more amendments in the period immediately following adoption than later.

The interviewer asked what can be done if an “absurd regulation” finds its way into the Fundamental Law; as an example he said that the Constitutional Court may only consider procedural questions when examining constitutional amendments – one of which recently prevented the commercial media from running election campaign ads. The Minister replied that such irregularities would be prevented by the court of public opinion, journalists, and “the other institutions.”

When asked what it is that the rest of the world does not understand, and why Hungary is criticized, Mr. Navracsics responded by saying that the Government interpreted the results of the 2010 general election as an opportunity for a new beginning, as – in addition to the massive victory and a “historic defeat for the Socialists” – two new parties entered Parliament to replace two others which had been there since the political transition of 1989/ 90. This combination of circumstances has provided an opportunity to respond to the promises that have so far been unredeemed in the transition to democracy, to respond to the political crises of preceding years, to fatigue in the system, and to the frustrations related to all this. A further opportunity had emerged to respond to the open questions of the 1989-90 transition, and to build a new constitutional order. The Fidesz minister believes that the rest of the world does not assess the situation in this way, and therefore finds it strange that this is happening in what had previously seemed to be a stable democracy.

There is a “wavering lack of confidence” in comments aimed at the country, and after the fourth amendment to the Fundamental Law the feeling has spread that “once again something is wrong in Hungary,” said Mr. Navracsics, who also pointed out that in the constitution of any European country there can be found two or three provisions which – with the help of a little malice – can be interpreted as violations of democracy, freedom of religion or speech, or other fundamental values. “This malice has been directed at us,” said the Minister, who nevertheless does not expect the EU to take steps which would force the Government to change direction, while – as has been stated earlier, and is still the case – the Government is prepared to discuss the adopted legislation with European institutions, and is ready to be persuaded by rational arguments.

Concerning the EU Commissioner for Fundamental Rights Viviane Reding, the Minister said that “her memory has continually deceived her,” and “she runs headlong into falsification of facts.” The Minister said that Ms. Reding, “makes statements which are expressly and tendentiously opposed to Hungary,” and which violate the demand for impartiality which requires that an EU commissioner “must not engage in politics.”

On the deaths of two Hungarian children in 2000, he said that the Irish authorities and Irish public opinion is on the side of Hungary, and against the driver responsible – Francis Ciarán Tobin. He thinks that either the Irish authorities persuaded the offender, or his own conscience dictated that it was right to serve the legally imposed sentence for his crime. However, Mr. Navracsics also noted that he is still afraid that Mr. Tobin will not come to Hungary, and Hungary cannot force him to do so. Of the district system, the Minister said that even his political opponents have praised the new structure of local administration starting up this year. Mr. Navracsics said that “I am thinking forward as far as spring 2014,” but plans to develop the system further are being made – mainly IT investments and the financial resources necessary for this.

According to the Minister of Justice, Parliament's decision has finalised the Act on Election Procedure, on the basis of which parties may start election preparations.

(Ministry of Public Administration and Justice)