When reading the report of a respected international organization, one presumes that it is based on thorough and careful research, particularly if the report was made with the participation of judges. One presumes that judges can remain unbiased when settling disputes. One presumes that their starting points are the relevant legislation, facts and evidence, and that they allow the parties to reflect upon these. This forms the basis of an objective and well-founded decision.

Unfortunately, the report of the International Association of Judges (IAJ) on the situation of the Hungarian judiciary had no such basis. The following chain of events shows how good intentions and willingness to help can be led astray by private interests, a network of private contacts, prejudices, misunderstandings and cover-ups.

So what exactly happened?

July 2018: “Crisis in judicial administration?”, a writing by dr. Viktor Vadász, a member of the National Judicial Council (NJC) appears on the website of the IAJ.

Note:

The IAJ failed to publish a contradictory writing which appeared on the website of the Hungarian Academy of Science (MTA). It was later found that the writing by dr. Viktor Vadász was sent to the IAJ by dr. Csaba Ujkéry.

25 July 2018: The president of the European Association of Judges (EAJ, a regional group of the IAJ) sends a letter to dr. Lajos Makai, president of the Hungarian Association of Judges (MABIE). According to this letter, recent events called the independence of the Hungarian judiciary into question. The letter pointed out that the article published on the IAJ website was written by a former leading member of the Hungarian association. To consider the further steps, the EAJ kindly asked the Hungarian association to comment on the judicial reforms, and to give opinion and recommendations on the issue.

Note:

The President of the National Office for the Judiciary (NOJ) learned about this letter from the president of the MABIE. The President of the NOJ asked the letter to be forwarded to her and she asked the president of the MABIE to notify her about the answer. The answer is still not known.

28 July 2018: The president of the MABIE writes a letter to the President of the NOJ: “… the writing in question was not sent to the IAJ through me or the MABIE, we have nothing to do with it. Please see attached the letter sent to me yesterday on this matter by the president of the EAJ.”

23 August 2018: HVG interviews dr. Csaba Ujkéry, who makes the following statement: “I wrote in my letter to the president of the European Association of Judges that I do not wish to criticise the system or a government policy. I just want to draw attention to an existing problem, which can be treated with proper analysis and recommendations based on its conclusions.”

Note:

no information indicates that dr. Csaba Ujkéry consulted with the MABIE before taking action.

05 September 2018: The President of the NOJ informs the president of the MABIE that she cannot accept their grant application, as it was for the financing of the international membership fee (HUF 5,000,000.-). As long as the actions of the MABIE remain unclear and it fails to notify the NOJ beforehand, the NOJ cannot support activities which discredit the President of the NOJ, the NOJ and the Hungarian judiciary on the international stage. The NOJ also offered to consider the grant application for a welfare or community event.

Note:

No new grant application has been received from the MABIE for the year 2018.

24 September 2018: dr. Csaba Ujkéry forwards his submission that he sent to the IAJ to the alfahir.hu website and states that “his submission will be discussed on the annual meeting of the IAJ, held in Marrakesh, scheduled on 16 October. The international organization may create a committee to examine the issues mentioned in the submission and give recommendations.”

25 September 2018: The president of the MABIE thanks the president of the EAJ for drawing attention to the article on the IAJ website. He confirms that the “rule of law” is the aim of the MABIE too, and it provides information on the remuneration for judges and tries to achieve a pay raise in that connection. He mentions the statements of judicial leaders that call the need for the existence of MABIE into question. Finally, he informs the president of the EAJ that the MABIE will meet on 13–14 October and that he will notify the president about the outcome.

Note:

The president of the MABIE sent this letter to the NOJ only on 7 November.

An important fact should be mentioned about the relation between the administrative leadership and the protection of the interests of judges. On 28 May 2018, on a judicial forum titled “The future of the judiciary”, board members of the MABIE proposed that the MABIE should reconstitute its own agenda and aspect in relation to the new career elements – such as family-friendly judiciary, advanced medical examination, education grants, additional benefits, development of the working environment or participation of judges in administration – defined by the NOJ and judicial leaders (many of whom were MABIE members).

26 September 2018: The following statement appears on the MABIE website: “The annual meeting of the IAJ and also the EAJ will take place in October. They will carry out a survey of the justice systems of the member states. The leaders of the MABIE cannot participate in the meeting, the organization will not be represented. The MABIE is not the source of the publications appearing in the media; the National Committee – the main decision-making body of the MABIE – will take a position on these on its next meeting.”

Note:

Neither the website of MABIE, nor other sources informed the judges whether the MABIE National Committee discussed the issue or what decision has been made.

14–18 October 2018: 61. General meeting of the IAJ in Marrakesh. Several news are published on the IAJ website, but none about Hungary.

Note:

The president of the MABIE stated that dr. Etelka Halász, judge of the Budapest Regional Court of Appeal, participated in the meeting as the wife of the retired Austrian judge Günter Woratsch, honorary president of the IAJ.

24 October 2018: The general secretariat of the IAJ sends a letter to the NOJ, with an unsigned and undated letter attached, written by the EAJ, which is also addressed to the NOJ. The latter states that the EAJ learned about the situation of the Hungarian justice system from the president of the MABIE and the delegates of the Moroccan meeting. On that basis, the EAJ questions the application of European standards in secondments, transfers and the appointment of judges and judicial leaders. The EAJ claims that it is authorized to ask questions, and even initiate a monitoring procedure. The OBH was asked to provide information on the addressed issues.

Note:

Procedures on the application for leadership positions and the

career progression of judges are governed by cardinal laws. The decisions of the president of the NOJ are regularly published in the Judicial Gazette. Moreover, specific (including applications for leadership positions, minutes of hearings and ad hoc information for judges) and general information is published on the central intranet and the website. Since 2012, a special report is prepared for the NJC on the evaluation of applications, a topic addressed in every semi-annual and annual report of the President of the NOJ.

25 October 2018: According to the article of alfahir.hu website the EAJ initiates a monitoring procedure on the Hungarian judicial system based on the telephone information provided by dr. Csaba Ujkéry. „At the Marrakesh session, the EAJ asked the Hungarian delegate, dr. Etelka Halász to call Mr Lajos Makai and ask his opinion on the future procedure. This was necessary because such a procedure may not be initiated without the consent of the Hungarian member organization. Makai said that they do not oppose the procedure and they stand by the NJC.

Note: neither that time nor before, the MABIE asked the NOJ about the questions written in the letter of the EAJ dated in October. The president of the MABIE has not informed the NOJ that a monitoring procedure might be initiated.

31 October 2018: The letter of the EAJ has been presented at a meeting between the president of the MABIE and the NOJ on the Loyalty Program. At this meeting MABIE-president Lajos Makai informed the NOJ that Etelka Halász, who is the wife of Günter Woratsch, acted without competence at the Marrakesh session of the EAJ and as such, Mr Makai did not have information on the issues Ms Halasz presented. The NOJ asked Mr Makai to send all the relevant documents to give an adequate answer to the questions of the EAJ.

Note: On the 7 November MABIE-president forwarded his letter sent to EAJ on 25 September to the NOJ. However, he has not forwarded any other e-mails, board decisions or information on the monitoring procedure ever since.

5 November 2018: At the plenary session of the National Assembly, Gábor Staudt, MP of the Jobbik party filed an immediate question to the Minister of Justice on the monitoring procedure of the EAJ.

26 November 2018: The president of NOJ informed the President of EAJ that the Hungarian member organization, the MABIE has not initiated a monitoring procedure and has not addressed the questions listed in the EAJ-letter to the NOJ. The President of the NOJ also informed the EAJ about the cooperation between MABIE and NOJ. On the application procedures of judges and judicial leaders the president of the NOJ referred to the materials on the main website of the judiciary that are available in English as well.

Note: this letter has been forwarded to the MABIE. After this answer, the NOJ has not received any information about further concerns or a monitoring procedure.

28^t February 2019: Günter Woratsch, on behalf of the International Judicial Association (IAJ) informed the NOJ that to gather further information on the Hungarian judicial system, a working group arrives to Hungary between 22-26 April 2019.

1 April 2019: the head of the working group, Stephan Gass informed the NOJ that they arrive to Hungary between 24-24 April 2019 and asked for a meeting.

25 April 2019: the president of the NOJ met Günter Woratsch, Stephan Gass (Swiss judge) and Gerhard Reisser (Austrian judge), the members of the group to present the achievements of the last 7 years in the judicial career. The president of the NOJ and her colleagues also handed out numerous written documents and materials on the judicial system including ones on the application procedures of judges and judicial leaders and answered the questions of the working group.

Note: the MABIE-members, who were supposed to have initiated the monitoring procedure, were not present with the working group. The visitors were definitely not prepared on the legal background of the issues. Their questions were based on opinions heard at their previous meeting (such as the meeting with a former judge, currently a lawyer Péter Szepesházi) and they were only interested in the relationship of the NOJ and the NJC. The President of the NOJ stressed out that as a judge it is essential in any monitoring procedure to clarify the legal background, the facts and evidences of the case. She noted that in an impartial procedure we can compare different opinions only if we are aware of the facts and the legal background.

9 May 2019: The Copenhagen plenary session of IAJ/EAJ accepted the report of the monitoring procedure.

Note: the draft report was not sent to the NOJ. The MABIE did not inform the NOJ on the draft report and did not provide the possibility to have remarks on the draft. The NOJ was not informed either when the draft report was discussed and adopted.

16 May 2019: The hvg.hu website published that a report of conviction had been accepted by the IAJ. According to the article “the report cites the case of Sándor Szabó (Secretary General of the MABIE and member of the National Judicial Council) who was threatened by the President of the NOJ that a disciplinary procedure would be initiated against him if he did not resign his NJC-membership.”

• An article was published on the main website of the judiciary about the visit of the IAJ-delegation

   

• The president of the NOJ called Sándor Szabó through his employer to ask hvg.hu and EAJ to correct their false statements.

   

17 May 2019: Sándor Szabó wrote a letter for the president of the NOJ: “I realized that statements of the report and the hvg article are not true, so I sent an e-mail to the editors of the website to correct their false statements. I also wrote a letter in English to the EAJ and asked the president of the MABIE to make all the necessary steps.”

Note: Even though the president of the NOJ asked so, Sándor Szabó (Group leader at Szombathely Regional Court, Secretary General of the MABIE and member of the NJC), did not forward his e-mails and letters for correction to his employer and to the president of the NOJ. This case is a good example how to incorporate false statements and paraphrasing in international reports. These statements are taken by the press and are referred to as well-known facts in the future.

17 May 2019: Letter of the President of the EAJ to the President of the NOJ. The report of the Fact Finding Mission adopted by the plenary session on 9 May 2019 was enclosed.

27 May 2019: Letter of the President of the NOJ to the President of the EAJ stressed out that even the initiation of the monitoring procedure was illegal because the MABIE denied the initiation of the procedure and the MABIE-members did not take part at the meeting of the working group and the NOJ. The procedure of the EAJ did not meet the requirements of the fair trial because the NOJ only had information on the final report from the press so the NOJ did not have the possibility to have remarks on it. Moreover, the statements of the report are not true due to the lack of knowledge on the legal background, the facts, and due to the biased opinions. Because of this, the EAJ-procedure have failed to meet the European standards required for a report made with the participation of judges: impartiality, evaluation of the relevant legal norms, facts evidences, and a well-founded, objective decision based on these elements.