The Triple Crisis in Hungary: The "Backsliding" of Hungarian Democracy after Twenty Years

Abstract

Introduction: The triple crisis in Member States In Hungary crisis of has taken place most markedly in both aspects of democracy, i.e. in formal institutions (procedural with rule of law and checks and balances system) and in their public performance (quality of with criteria of good governance). Therefore Hungary may offer itself as a worst case scenario, even when looking back until 2010, but it is much more so, if period incumbent Orban government has also been taken into account. The Democracy Index 2011 has put it clearly: Some negative trends have recently got worse. Hungary perhaps prime example among EU's new member states in region. (DI, 2011: 21). The Freedom House Report, Nations in Transit 2013 has supported this view when it has evaluated of in New EU States: the most prominent example of this phenomenon may be Hungary, whose Nation in Transit rates have weakened more since EU accession than those of any other member state, with largest decline in 2010 and 2011. Under leadership of Prime Minister Viktor Orban conservative Fidesz party has used its to increase control over a number of key institutions, most notably judiciary and media regulator. (FH, 2013: 6). Thus, this paper asks about special reasons for this Hungarian worst case scenario, i.e. how Hungary has become from trendsetter in late eighties latecomer, worst performer in early 2010s. No doubt that international ranking institutions have shown similar worrying tendencies of backsliding of democracy in all new democracies due to global crisis, since Global in has been evident for some time (DI, 2011: 2). The titles of Freedom House Reports and Democracy Index of Economist Intelligence Unit have indicated this trend (see FH, 2011a,b and FH, 2013 as well as DI, 2010, 2011 and 2013). Still general framework to analyse Hungarian development can only be group of Member States, above all eight NMS from Poland to Bulgaria where this tendency has also been pointed out in above Reports at length and in depth. Therefore, for proper analysis of particular features in Hungarian developments, it is necessary to compare them in their major points and on their key issues with NMS developments in general. But this paper does not claim to give a general picture of NMS case and it restricts itself to analysis of Hungary. (3) The most intriguing issue in this paper is why and how a deep change took place at 2010 elections producing two-thirds, constitution-making majority of Fidesz that led to some kind of during incumbent government as latest Nations in Transit Report has emphasized. Simply said, main problem in Hungarian case is not parliamentary supermajority in itself but abuse of this majority by violating checks and balances system, i.e. seeking political control over a number of key institutions. There have been many analyses about decline of Hungarian in Orban government. Hungary has also become ill famed in international media. But main issue has remained unanswered so far: why did voters give confidence in 2010 to a national-social populist party in Hungary after twenty years of democratization, i.e. why millions of Hungarians were so disillusioned, so exhausted and so desperate that they abstained at elections or supported this constitutional coup d'etat as abuse of parliamentary supermajority against young democracy. (4) Instead of simply arguing about widespread discontent with democratic mess, this paper goes deeper to discover long process of socio-economic crisis that generated protracted crisis and its cumulative effects led to rupture in 2010. …