My main point with the posts was this: While it may not fit with the tale being spun by some, the fact is that the governing parties, Fidesz and KDNP, have taken effective legal action against these extremists groups that clamps down on their activity.

The blog posts got a good deal of feedback, some of it rather colorful, on my About Hungary Facebook page and my twitter account. Among others, Lydia Gall, the Human Rights Watch researcher, tweeted me with a few skeptical questions about how effective these laws have been with regard to certain Jobbik and Magyar Gárda events. As Twitter’s 140 characters are hardly enough to provide a detailed answer to these issues, I collected the most common questions and misunderstandings regarding the topic, in order to give the reader – and Ms. Gall – a detailed answer.

Q: So who banned the ‘Magyar Gárda’? Was it the Orbán government or the Gyurcsány-Bajnai governments?

A: The organization behind the Magyar Gárda was banned by a court decision (in 2009, during but not by the Gyurcsány government), based on a law on civil society associations that had long been in effect. Unfortunately, the formal, legal ban on the organization was not enough to solve the problem: the Gárda members simply formed other legal or illegal organizations and marched around Roma settlements for days in uniform, acting as vigilantes. They were not necessarily doing anything overtly against the law, but their presence in black uniforms was itself intimidating and unsettling. Nevertheless, the police had no legal means at the time to take action against them.

An Orbán Government initiative was approved by Parliament in 2011 that made it illegal for groups of people, in uniform, to gather on public property with the intent of causing fear in any group of people. So, instead of banning an organization, the government banned the activity. It’s the so-called ‘uniformed crime’ law.

Q: What’s the result of this new provision? Has anybody been arrested or charged?

A: To date, no one has been arrested or charged based on this new provision, but it has been an effective deterrent. We do not see groups of vigilantes in uniform marching around and the police just standing there without any legal tool to intervene. Those involved with Gárda-like activity have taken note. The kind of Magyar Gárda activity we witnessed in Gyöngyöspata and Hajdúhadház has stopped.

Q: But why do we still see people demonstrating in black uniforms that look like the old Gárda?

A: It’s a thin line. While we need to counter ethnic hatred and extremism to protect our democracy, we also have to safeguard the freedom of expression and association, and the government must not intervene in the due process of law enforcement and the courts.

An individual has the right to wear more or less whatever clothes he or she likes. And individuals must have the right to demonstrate, according to the relevant law. If, however, the person displays hate symbols or acts in a manner offensive or threatening to a group of people, then, under legislation passed by the current Parliament, he or she could face charges.

Q: So, it is okay if someone threatens the Roma people as long as it is an official demonstration and not organized by the Gárda?

A: No. The law on demonstrations clearly states that exercising the freedom of assembly should not be with the intention to commit crimes or call for committing crimes and cannot violate the rights and freedom of others. If a speaker threatens a particular community, then he or she commits a crime. If someone encourages an audience to threaten Roma people, then that’s a crime.

But that is not regulated as a ‘uniformed crime,’ as that provision only aims at activity described above. If it’s a legal, public demonstration, then it has its own organizer responsible for the event, who can be held accountable. If it’s an illegal ‘Magyar Gárda’ event, then it doesn’t.

Q: But in August 2012, we saw people in Gárda uniform demonstrating and verbally attacking Roma people in, for example, Devecser and Cegléd. Why hasn’t anyone been charged in those cases?

A: First, it must be understood that if a group of people commit vandalism, the existing laws protect the victims. The ‘uniformed crime’ amendment to the Penal Code outlawed activities where the perpetrators did not commit any physical or verbal crime, but intimidated the victims with their presence. Cegléd is a different story. There, a group of people during a demonstration, or after the demonstration was over, allegedly engaged in illegal activity. The case is still open, so as a government official, I am obliged to say “allegedly,” lest I be seen as interfering with the police and the court.

In Devecser, there is a police investigation underway, according to the latest news reports. Cegléd is trickier and what exactly happened there is unclear. The government’s role here is to let the police, and the courts, do their work. We have to be patient. It is not uncommon that an investigation lasts this long.

Q: Is the status quo on the matter satisfactory?

A: There is still work to be done, of course. But that shouldn’t obscure the results we have achieved so far. Hungary has been doing better since 2010 in this regard, and thoughtful observers should be cautious listening to the false accusations that this government is not doing everything in its power to counter extremism. Solutions will not come easy.

Source: A Blog About Hungary

This opinion does not necessarily represent the views of this portal, your opinion is welcome too via info@xpatloop.com