“Border hunters” join soldiers and policemen at the Serbian-Hungarian border

It was about a month and a half ago that I wrote two posts dealing with the abominable circumstances along the Serbian-Hungarian border where hundreds of refugees wait for admittance into Hungary but authorities process only fifteen people a day. The authorities could easily handle ten times that number, but they purposely slow the process to discourage those waiting on the other side of the fence. In addition, a new directive now allows Hungarian soldiers and policemen to catch and forcibly remove anyone who gets through the fence illegally and is found within eight kilometers of the border. This government order can easily lead to violence.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) published a detailed description of the alleged abuses at the Serbian-Hungarian border. The organization found that “people who cross into Hungary without permission, including women and children, have been viciously beaten and forced back across the border.” A few days later Nick Thorpe of BBC paid a visit to the area and confirmed the findings of HRW. What followed these reports was a furious denial by the Hungarian authorities of any and all wrongdoing.

Given the bad publicity, one would have thought that the ministry of defense and the ministry of the interior would make sure that soldiers and policemen along the border would be extra careful and would handle the deportation procedures without any unnecessary violence. But, according to an Afghan refugee, this is what happens if a refugee is caught by an officer. “First, they use pepper spray, after which they beat him, handcuff him, and then they let the dogs loose on him. After all this he will be taken back to Serbia.” And, he added, “Only God can help us!” A Syrian man drowned, even though he was a strong swimmer, when Hungarian soldiers or policemen attacked him and his companions with pepper spray and rocks. The Hungarian authorities are allegedly investigating this case. Most of the refugees who complained got nowhere. The Hungarian police didn’t think they had a case.

Medical urgency. The young man almost died.

Medical emergency. The young man almost died.

Yesterday, for the first time, Károly Papp, the national police chief, admitted that there have been several instances in which policemen mistreated refugees. In fact, criminal proceedings have been launched in four cases. We’ll see what happens. I wouldn’t hold my breath.

Meanwhile the Hungarian government decided that the Serbian-Hungarian border defense must be reinforced, and so it launched a campaign to recruit an additional 3,000 men and women. These people will constitute a special unit within the police force, specifically trained for duty along the border. They will be called “határvadászok” (border hunters) instead of “rendőrök” (policemen).

During the Rákosi and Kádár periods, when the borders were hermetically sealed, the military had a separate unit whose members were called “határőrök” (border guards). This special military force ceased to exist with the arrival of democracy and open borders. For years, however, the extreme right political party Jobbik has been demanding the re-creation of this force, which up until now the Orbán government has resisted. Finally, pressured by the flood of refugees whom they want to keep out of Hungary, the government obliged.

Naming these new border guards “border hunters” is significant. A guard is passive until whatever he is guarding is attacked. A hunter actively pursues the game. Orbán’s wordsmiths are exceedingly clever and know how to manipulate the linguistically unsophisticated public.

The reinforcement of the borders has already cost a small fortune, and adding this special unit to the police force will also be very expensive. According to the information provided by Károly Papp, seven units have been trained so far for border duty. Plans call for an additional eight units. That also means enlarging police facilities in several cities, like Budapest, Győr, Szombathely, Debrecen, Szeged, Orosháza, and Kiskunhalas.

The recruiting program is substantial because, I suspect, serving along the border is not exactly a cushy job. I have read horror stories about the primitive circumstances the soldiers and policemen must endure. The government’s hope is that unemployed white collar workers and those who are currently employed as public workers will be willing to become hunters. It seems that by now the police force is ready to hire even those who had been rejected earlier. The training will take six months. By next May an extra 3,000 men and women will be able to serve along the southern border.

All this frantic defense of the country from the refugees is totally senseless because the people who are waiting in Serbia for legal entry or who illegally try to break through the fence have no intention of remaining in Hungary. It is also unlikely that unwilling migrants would be forcibly settled in Hungary. Or, even if there was such a joint decision in Brussels, the numbers Hungary would have to deal with would be small. Moreover, as it stands now, Hungary is letting the few already registered refugees quietly leave the country. Those who until now have been living in closed camps are given a railway ticket and a map to find their way to Körmend, a town close to the Austrian border, from where they disappear across the Austrian border within a couple of days.

But if that is the case, why did the Orbán government insist on sealing Hungary’s southern border? The answer is simple. It is only for domestic political reasons. The overwhelming majority of the population supports Orbán’s migration policy and doesn’t mind the billions spent on the fence or on the manpower to hunt down the refugees. On the contrary, they welcome it. And Viktor Orbán is ready to sacrifice everything, including the reputation of the country and the country’s relationship with the rest of the democratic world, for political gain. Unfortunately, for the time being at least it seems to to be working.

August 25, 2016
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Istvan
Guest

Eva if the so called Hungarian Border Hunters training program is actually 6 months long then it is longer than the training program for US Border Patrol agents which at one point was only 12 weeks and now may be 19 weeks again. I have my doubts the training program for the hunters will be that long.

To put it simple chasing illegal border crossers is a real shit job whether in Hungary or in the Arizona desert. It’s depressing arresting basically destitute people day after day and only occasionally stopping something like illegal drugs or a potential terrorist. Our Border Patrol in the USA is a mess and I am sure it’s the same in many countries. Here is a link to a video on the poorly trained Border Patrol in the USA https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hc6ZAGAppE8

Guest

You couldn’t make this up (in a civilised country at least …) – nobody would believe you!

All this reminds me very much of the “Socialist” regime as shown in those tragicomic movies like A Tanú etc.

I feel so lucky …

Guest

Not too much OT:

Mrs Merkel is in Poland today and will later meet all the Visegrad4 prime ministers – it will be interesting.

Already the Polish foreign minister has criticised the Germans for being “selfish” in th refugee question.

I hope that Mrs Merkel will tell them clearly:

Behave or f*ck off!

Already many in Germany want a return of the Iron Curtain (not really of course). Those bloody Eastern Europeans are dragging the EU down – and they have the gall to call themselves part of Central Europe while their brains are typical Balkan: me, me, me …

Maybe those Polish jokes aren’t too far off?

Guest
Re: Germany in the 21st If we look at countries in the CE after the post-war period it would appear that a sort of a re-evaluation of values has been going on. Some have sputtered but others like Germany have spectacularly picked themselves up, dusted off the reviled past and reconstituted the country as a contributor of exemplary values to all Europe and the world. A great national achievement incorporating strong democratic entrenchment. What can be said of Magyarorszag? Would one be remiss in noting that it is apparent that the government is still using intimidation and physical hostility to get their points across? Today it is occurring at the border. Where next? The migrant issue then would appear at the least to be some kind of sublimation where they are simply the substitutes of directed hatred that could easily go to others. Germany in the 21st has learned the lessons of the 20th very well. She has learned to generate and construct better values within its nation. And they seem to have been followed. Something to ponder for revisionists and those who insist on following values gone awfully awry. Could be a time to then wake up out of… Read more »
Andrzej Dupa
Guest

It’s so embarassing to live in the Mid-eastern Europe right now. And it will be so, until we start hunting the hunters. A few victims on their side for a change should make the bastards think twice next time.

Guest from Slovakia
Guest
“All this frantic defense of the country from the refugees is totally senseless because the people who are waiting in Serbia for legal entry or who illegally try to break through the fence have no intention of remaining in Hungary. It is also unlikely that unwilling migrants would be forcibly settled in Hungary. Or, even if there was such a joint decision in Brussels, the numbers Hungary would have to deal with would be small.” Unfortunately you have very little (or none) understanding of current migrant crisis and of political reactions in the rest of Europe. To put it shortly: this hungarian border enabled the Visegrad states to successfully resist so called European relocation scheme. Original German plan was to put other European states under pressure (through financial costs of managing migrant flow through their territory) to achieve the acceptance of mandatory relocation quotas. They succeeded partially in Balkan which tried to accommodate with German policy (in a certain time period at least, until Austria changed its stance). As Visegrad was able to stay “clean” of refugees there was no political/financial leverage that could be used (by Germans) to force it into accepting the quotas. You are also wrong about… Read more »
Guest

Little fascist, read my comment above!

Guest from Slovakia
Guest

Long story short: “Nazi/fascist” labelling obviously functions very good in Germany. But let me put it straight: you are NOT discussing with a German right now. We – Eastern Europeans – are not afraid of being labelled by primitives of your kind. We are not afraid of being kicked out of a job because of writing what we think on facebook, twitter or whatsoever – as is the custom in Germany nowadays. We are not afraid of being kicked out from our houses/flats because of incompetent government looking – in panic – for new possibilites to house those vast numbers of “refugees”. We Eastern Europeans like straight talk and are fed up with political correctness!

So if you have any argument, lets put it on the table. If you dont – then shut up!

webber
Guest

Can Slovakia really do without all the money the EU is giving the country?
Just asking.

Guest from Slovakia
Guest
Well, as far as I know Slovakia existed long before it entered European Union and despite widely spread belief about poor East being saved by rich and humanistic West (after the fall of Soviet bloc) the things were quiet different: – it is neccessary to understand that the East lost a war in 1989 – 1990. Dont be fooled by the fact there werent any shots, tanks or air bombardments. It was a different war, one which was fought through proxy-campaigns (Vietnam, Afghanistan etc.) but it was war nevertheless. What happened after? As one of the first measures RVHP has been destroyed – a common trading area of eastern bloc states. Then a massive wave of privatisation took place throughout the eastern states – an absolutely stupid ideological concept leading in the end to destruction of domestic production capacities in all those countries. Hand in hand with that an ideological indoctrination took place, all those neo-liberal economical concepts used in the West 30, 40, 50 years ago and outdated long ago. Of course none of this would be possible without an another present from the West: a wide network of NGOs who took the position of “neutral” arbiter of almost… Read more »
Guest

So you’re still a communist at heart …
Go join Putin’s Eurasian Union!

Re the importance of the vast new eastern market territories:

If you do shopping at Lidl or Aldi (I assume you have them too) and look at a typical package you’ll find the description often in more than 20 languages …

Guest from Slovakia
Guest

I only just explained why there never will be sanctions against the states refusing migrant quotas. Nor will there be any other kind of “penalty” against those states. Its not about comunism or fascism or any other -ism, – its about geopolitics! Like it or not.

webber
Guest

Привет Guest!

webber
Guest

Привет!
Где ты? В Новосибирске?

webber
Guest

Wolfi – I’d bet Guest is actually writing from Russia. The diction is a giveaway, not to mention the arguments which no Hungarian or Slovak would make.

Guest from Slovakia
Guest

Really? So answer me, Webber: if the western countries helped so “altruistically” all the eastern countries during the last 2 decades…why is there no common sense of gratefulness among their inhabitants? Why is it that only western politicians, journalists and all those think-tank geniuses always speak about some kind of gratefulness Eastern Europeans should (according to them) feel? Simply question I would say…

webber
Guest

Yep, you’re Russian! This is Dugin b.s.
“War without a shot fired.” Complete lunacy.

There is not a Slovak or Hungarian alive who would say what you’ve been writing here.

For your information – and this is something any Slovak, Slovene, Croat, Hungarian, or Czech will tell you – with the exception of the period of Soviet occupation, these nations have all been integral parts of the West for, roughly speaking, a thousand years. Only Soviet rule made them, for a very short time, part of the East.

So, who is a loser? The East you say? Then Russia. is a loser.

Who is a winner? The West, you say? Then Slovakia and Hungary are winners.

Both nations decided to join both NATO and the EU out of their own free will, for your information.

Many thanks for getting rid of Nazism. No thanks for imposing Soviet Communism.

Guest from Slovakia
Guest

No, I am not. Ask this blogs administrator – my IP adress is quite clear. To your comment: Yeah, Slovakia decided to join EU out of free will. No, Slovakia did not decide to join NATO out of free will. There never was a referendum (unlike EU) and there NEVER was a majority of habitants supporting it. Today there is no more than 30% support for slovak membership in NATO. And trust me – it will not change for the better.

webber
Guest

Well, there WAS a referendum on joining NATO in Hungary, and the majority of Hungarians voted to join the alliance.

Andrzej Dupa
Guest

Political correctness of today means nazis get all red and smokey when you call them nazis. They’d prefer PC words such as “nationalist” or “right-winger”. I say, enough of this garbage. Poop is poop, no matter how well perfumed.

Bowen
Guest

Orban has announced a second, “massive” fence on the Serbian border. He said today that migrants are “poison”.

“The border cannot be defended with flowers and cuddly toys, the border can be defended with police, soldiers and weapons,” he added.

Guest

A bit OT again:

There’s an interesting article in the Guardian on the more than 800 000 Poles (!) living and working (92%of them) in the UK written by a Polish press correspondent – what will happen to them?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/25/britains-polish-wanted-to-stay-here-for-ever-until-the-eu-referendum

Wonder if anyone might write a similar article on the Hungarians living there or in DACH.

And or SPIEGEL reports that in East Germany many protest voters have switched from the Communist Left (which still got 20% of the votes in the last elections) to the right wing AfD.

I’ve been thinking for a long time that the intransigent position re refugees in the East is a remnant of those 40 years of Socialism. It’s especially remarkable because so many people there were refugees themselves and should know the horrors – it’s not a holiday trip leaving your home country for an unknown destination and an unknown future!

And to think that most of these anti-refugee people call themselves Christian when the Bible says everybody is your brother …

Member

wolfi777, maybe your wife ca translate the following article to you that I found very-very interesting. http://hataratkelo.blog.hu/2016/08/24/a_tulpart_fele
I would start wit the “SZERK.KÖZL.: ” at the bottom as that explains who is the person who wrote this article. It is very amusing!!!

Guest

Thanks, Some1 – I tried google translate which gave me an idea of the guy, a mathematician like me!
Life can be strange …

Istvan
Guest
Hungarians will soon learn that Border control can’t just be along the Orban fence it has to extend further into Hungary. In the USA federal regulations give U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) authority to operate within 100 miles of any U.S. “external boundary.” This means believe it or not my own home here in Chicago which is close to Lake Michigan falls within the zone. This means that aspects of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects Americans from random and arbitrary stops and searches does not apply to Border Patrol agents even in Chicago. For example the Border Patrol can if it so chooses within the City of Chicago without a warrant or even suspicion of wrongdoing to justify conduct what courts have called a “routine searches,” such as searching luggage or any vehicle. I was stopped by border patrol agents on snow mobiles five miles in the forest from the Canadian border near International Falls, Minnesota while dog sledding only three years ago. I thought I maybe had illegally crossed into Canada because of a GPS error, the agents said no I was well within the USA but they had authority where I was. While Border… Read more »
Member

” federal regulations give U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) authority to operate within 100 miles of any U.S. “external boundary.”
Don’t give any ideas to Orban who will hold a press conference explaining that they will implement the same as the USA. This is always what Fidesz does, as they reason with “other developed countries do it”, and provide no context.
There is not a single point in Hungary that is further from some border than 100 miles (160 km)! It measures about 250 km from north to south.

Reality Check
Guest

“This means that aspects of the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects Americans from random and arbitrary stops and searches does not apply to Border Patrol agents even in Chicago.”

That is not true, the Constitution still applies, although some agents violate it.

You are providing false information. They are not allowed to search without a warrant or even suspicion of wrongdoing. Again some against are violating the law.

I wonder if you are just trying to deflect from the Hungarian situation.

https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights-governments-100-mile-border-zone-map

Istvan
Guest
Yes that is the ACLU position, the Border Patrol does not fully agree. There have been several cases of searches of legitimate citizens by the Border Patrol in the 100 mile zone where illegal drugs have been found that have been thrown out and others where they have not. Where legitimate citizens have been transporting undocumented aliens the power of warrantless searches has often been upheld. The difference is to be found in the case United States v. Martinez-Fuerte, 428 U.S. 543 (1976). The Court deemed the intrusion on Fourth Amendment interests to be quite limited, even if officers acted on the basis of the Mexican appearance of the occupants in referring motorists to a secondary inspection area for questioning, whereas the elimination of the practice would deny to the Government its only practicable way to apprehend smuggled aliens and to deter the practice. Similarly, outside of the border/aliens context, the Court has upheld use of fixed “sobriety” checkpoints at which all motorists are briefly stopped for preliminary questioning and observation for signs of intoxication. The most famous case is Willy Nelson. See http://stillisstillmoving.com/willienelson/border-patrol-makes-70-100-drug-related-arrests-a-week-at-checkpoint/ Nelso later reached a plea deal, so he plead guilty and had the best legal advise.
Reality Check
Guest

You have also failed to mention that Obama assigned an outsider to reform the agency.

Comparisons of the US to Hungary regarding this issue is a false equivalency. A tactic used repeatedly by Fidesz and their supporters.

webber
Guest

Do all rights enshrined in the US Constitution apply to non-citizens? There has been at least a century of debate on that – the “no” answer is part of why Native Americans pushed for full US citizenship – and I’m not sure a satisfactory answer has yet been found.

Istvan
Guest
webber you are correct detained undocumented aliens do not have all the rights I have. But they do retain do process rights Native Americans are a complex issue and my Iroquois wife could speak to it far more competently than I can. But the long and short of it is tribal sovereignty in the United States is the inherent authority of indigenous tribes to govern themselves within the borders of the United States of America. The U.S. federal government recognizes tribal nations as “domestic dependent nations” and has established a number of laws attempting to clarify the relationship between the federal, state, and tribal governments. The reference to Indians in the Constitution is not to grant local sovereignty. Then there was the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 (43 Stat. 253, Ch. 233 (1924)), which granted all non-citizen resident Indians citizenship. It declared that there were no longer any “Indians, not taxed” to be not counted for purposes of United States Congressional apportionment. President Calvin Coolidge signed the bill into law.. My wife’s tribe has carried out extensive litigation over property rights some of which can be read at http://www.isledegrande.com/senecainfo.htm So Webber while Native Americans are now US citizens the dynamics… Read more »
John Doe
Guest

It’s enough to read the US Constitution to see, that there is no such distinction there, except for privileges such as holding a higher office. There’s nothing there about “Mexicans” not being “People” or about the right for a cop to kill a person because he/she is black.

Guest

OT..

I have seen that more have turned in their awards after the Bayer fiasco. Apparently the particular award to Bayer has caused a great ’emotional’ resonance in various individuals from all walks of life. It is apparent that they and others seem to have reached a ‘Rubicon’ and made a decision as to who and what they believe in. It will be interesting to see how future opinion impacts on Mr. Bayer’s persona by segments of the population and from those abroad.

tappanch
Guest

The Obama administration came down on the side of the Turkish dictatorship in Syria, basically joining the Iranian-Turkish-Syrian[Assad] alliance against the Kurds.

On the one hand, this helps the Da’esh (“Islamic State”) a great deal. (The Kurds spent a lot of effort to liberate Manbij from Da’esh, and two days later the US vice president publicly ordered them out of the town. Of course, the Kurds will be reluctant to sacrifice their men in Arab-populated areas (e.g.Raqqa and Mosul) to fight Da’esh in the future.

On the other hand, the strengthening of the Assad regime, its Russian and Iranian allies has other other consequences as well – more Sunni areas will be cleansed of Sunnis. (Today, Sunnis started to evacuate Daraya, after 4 years of siege). That will increase the number of refugees from Syria.

PALIKA
Guest
It may not be too far fetched to speculate whether we would have IS in control in Iraq and Syria if the Russians had not stopped Obama/Camero plan to depose Assad. It used to be unchallanged orthodoxy that the West supported pro western dictators because to keep them in power was likely to ensure stability. When this orthodoxy was challanged by Bush/Blair in Iraq, Cameron et al in the Arab Sping and most recently in Syria the stability of the Middle East, such as it was completely fell apart. It’s impact on our lives in Europe is devastating. Terror attacks, mass migration are the prime symptoms. Mrs Clinton was there at the cradle of this disaster packed period. She speaks pretty about equality, as does the ex Police Minister in the UK who is now PM. There are some of us who regard security as an objective that overrides compliance with the dictates of political correctness. Whilst I detest Farage and everything he stands for I agree with him I would not vote for her even if I could or if she paid me. The choice is unenviable. Trump is not exactly smelling of roses. There really should be a… Read more »
webber
Guest

Tappanch and Palika: How is all this pontificating about the Middle East related to the topic of this blog?
I don’t see it.
Don’t you think you might do this on another blog about that region?

PALIKA
Guest

Quite easy to see. The instability in the Middle East is at the root of the migrant problem in Europe. Many of those who offer solutions are the culprits who brought it about. One should be careful before following their advice.
Also the narrow issue of OV’s conduct is pretty repetitive. Digression can liven things up.

webber
Guest

P.S. Palika, you already admitted you were wrong about Trump. Can’t you just drop it? Your personal preferences for president have nothing to do with this blog.

It is obvious from your comments that you are not very well acquainted with American politics. You wrote “there really should be a third, compromise candidate”

For your information, there always are other candidates on the ballot for president in most states. This year, for the Constitution Party, Darrel Castle; for the Green Party, Jill Stein; for the Libertarian Party, Gary Johnson. There are candidates from even smaller parties on the ballot in a few states.

But the choice now is between Trump and Hillary, because the last time a non-Republican or Democrat won the election was the Whig candidate, Fillmore, in 1850.

I’m not sure why you bother to state your preferences when you are not a US citizen and clearly don’t know much about the process in the US. I also don’t understand why you say anything at all about the American elections on a blog about Hungary.

PALIKA
Guest

Webber, calm down. Pour yourself another drink, take a deep breath, read an improving book and then return to this blog if you must. But you must not feel you have to

tappanch
Guest

Here is a new article that details the cruel treatment the Hungarian authorities exercise against asylum applicants at the Serbian border.

https://atlatszo.hu/2016/08/26/kek-egyenruhas-rendorok-kutyakkal-okollel-es-gazsprevel-verik-vissza-a-menekulteket-a-szerb-magyar-hataron/

tappanch
Guest
PALIKA
Guest

Ok, in the UK the position is identical. Is this an example that the UK is on a par with OV?

It simply demonstrates that except for a very few countries the use of the device is part of the armoury of political people management.

When the orthodoxy was different when I was a student the establishment view in the UK was that, correctly, referendum has no place in a representative democracy. Wilson, probably a Soviet spy, used the device to get him off a hook in his snake pit of a Labour Party in 1975 on Europe.

Cameron then used the device for the same purpose. In calling his Brexit referendum he failed to specify the criteria for validity or whether it would be advisory or binding. Of course it cannot be binding, but the ex Police Minister PM thinks it is. Or not if it suites her to change her mind.

That is life in our brave new world where words do not mean what you think they mean. It is not as new as all that. Orwell spelt it out in 1984. He knew, he was a socialist and a pissed off BBC journalist.

webber
Guest

Again…
Referenda are considered binding in all cases I know of. In the states where they are held regularly (Switzerland, and most US states west of the Mississippi). Wikipedia spits out 61 countries in which referenda have been held. I see none in which they are not considered binding (though I haven’t looked closely), and certainly no democratic states in which referenda are not considered binding.

A “non-binding” referenda is just as ridiculous as a “non-binding free election,” meaning “if you vote the way we don’t want you to vote,” (i.e., for the opposition, or the opposition’s platform) “we will consider the election invalid.” That is nonsense – the antithesis of democracy.

Not having referenda at all is one option. Not allowing referenda that violate constitutional rights is another (US states’ model). But ignoring the results of referenda is unheard of in democracies.

webber
Guest

P.S. The last I saw, all three major parties in the UK agreed that the Brexit referendum was binding, and that the UK would be leaving the EU (how and when yet to be worked out). I see only scattered dissent with this view in party ranks.

Seems you are living in the wrong country, Palika.

PALIKA
Guest
Welcome back. Thanks for taking my advice. The UK has very flexible rules in place of Constitution. This enables it to appear to some as a banana monarchy. There is however one rule which is immutable. This is the sovereignty of Parliament. To anyone brought up on scholarly systems such as the French, the German, the Swiss and above all the USA presents serious political and intellectual challanges. Be that as it may it must follow that in a representative democracy with the supreme rule of the sovereignty of Parliament you simply cannot have a binding referendum. Short if denying parliament a vote how do you make it binding? The Brexit question is a nonsense and only a PR fool would think of one. The ex Police Minister, who as part of her mission wants to abolish inequality says it does not need a vote in Parliament to give effect to a nonsense vote. Whether the UK leaves the EU remains to be seen. The mess that has been generated is with us to stay. I hope that the pragmatism that has been for a long time part of the UK political system survives, though I have my doubts. Aggressive… Read more »
webber
Guest

Now a question – was it not Parliament which voted for and approved the Brexit referendum?
If so, then Parliament gave the mandate to the voters.
There is no need for a further vote in Parliament. The decision has been made.

webber
Guest
PALIKA
Guest

But did not set out the follow up. It could have but it did not. Another example of Cameronland. Apart from the EU treaty and the ECHR which are binding on Parloament, but can of course be repealed nothing can bind Parliament to pass or not to pass whatever law. Can for example Parliament bind its successor? Of course not.
The Daily Mail which supports English jingoist bigotry and thus supports the PM’s view. She is scared to lose a Parliamentary vote hence she does not want to call one. The matter is going to be challanged.

webber
Guest
No. According to all the analysis you might care to read, the issue is not triggering the UK’s exit from the EU. Bothand the Tories have agreed that the referendum is binding – binding because allowed by vote of Parliament. Britain will leave the EU. The issue is whether Parliament a vote on negotiation, or rather the broad mandate to negotiate. Leaving – fine. How you leave is rather important, though. Parliament should, according to some, be consulted on “how.” Now, this is an odd point. I seem to recall that in Britain, as in most countries, government does not need to ask the legislature to approve foreign policy. A British government can negotiate with a foreign government at will, without Parliament. If the EU is now a foreign entity, why should the government ask Parliament? Those who disagree say that that mythical creature, the “British Constitution” (sorry to Bagehot’s ghost), will be altered and therefore Parliament must be consulted. If May is clever, she will trigger leaving the EU without entering negotiations, and then will ask Parliament to debate how to leave, by presenting Parlaiment with a vague broad set of negotiating principles nobody could disagree with. Labour will,… Read more »
webber
Guest

“Both LABOUR and Tories have agreed…” (2nd sentence above)

PALIKA
Guest

PS please remember the point about who can call a referendum that in practicle terms OV is not out of line, but absolutely mainstream.

Guest

Are you going crazy again?

Seems you really are a Fidesz troll!

The point is that Fidesz uses all means to make sure that no one else can initiate a referendum – remember the story about the hooligans that blocked the entrance?

PS:
Will you follow the example of the latest troll “Doy” too? That creature nicely shows what to expect in Hungary/from Hungarians!

PALIKA
Guest

Before you get too excited look around the world for the divers rules for who and how can call a referendum. In my view the whole idea is a cop out in a representative democracy. The Hungarians made a mistake providing for such. But please let me know if In the UK, France, Germany or Italy a group of citizens can call a referendum. It is almost always a mischievous service for Political manuipulation.
Do not your time calling me a troll.

Guest

Do not waste our time please – just try to answer!
The point is that Fidesz uses all means to make sure that no one else can initiate a referendum – remember the story about the hooligans that blocked the entrance?

PALIKA
Guest

wolfi, of course he wants to manipulate the use of the referendum to suit his purposes. He is not alone in this vide: Cameron. It backfired in DC’s case. He would be no match for OV in the politics game. This is not meant to be an accolade to either.
As a means of achieving good government holding referendums is both mischievous and counter productive. In the case of the UK it is probably against the Constitution such as it is. The judges will tell us in due course.

Guest

You just don’t get it! Fidesz uses all means (legal and illegal) to ensure that no one else can initiate a referendum! Doesn’t matter on which topic …

PS:
Have you looked at those horrible “Tudta …” billboards? Financed by the Hungarian taxpayers of course.

PALIKA
Guest

Yes I have. Awful stuff.

My point is that OV wants to have the sole right to decide whether to hold a referendum. That is exactly the same position held by most governments especially the UK one. They alone decide whether to hold a referendum. So why is OV different?

webber
Guest

As you may know, in many states (most Western American ones), referenda can get on the ballot through citizen initiatives if a sufficient number of people sign a petition or form asking for a particular referendum question to be on the ballot (as long as a court determines it does not violate the constitution, and meets certain other standard).
In theory, Hungary is one of these states. The Hungarian law is quite different from that of Britain (which you know well).

It is not the Hungarian legislation on referenda that is the problem.
OV has simply blocked referenda he does not like through his judges, who make bizarre and contradictory decisions on the admissibility of referenda.
OV’s referendum question would never have passed court vetting if it had been put by the opposition.

webber
Guest

No, OV is not mainstream.

First, you can’t cite Britain as “mainstream” in referenda, because by your own admission it is not a referendum-friendly state. Referenda are “foreign”, in your view, to Britain.

If you look at those states where referenda are regularly held, you will find that what OV has done is very out of line.

If you look, moreover, at the Hungarian referendum law a little more closely, you’ll find that he has violated both the letter and the spirit.

Guest

Thanks, Webber, for explaining it to Palika – but I think he doesn’t want to understand!

PALIKA
Guest

Ok, I dare say he has done both. OV is doing exactly the same as what Cameron did. They both called meaningless referendums for entirely disreputable political purposes. The only difference is that unfortunately in OV’s case it will work whereas in the case of the English fool it had blown up in his face. I do not care tuppence about his face but I do care about the future prosperity of my family. Both men deserve to be judged by the same standard. Do not get carried away by the fact that DC is an old Etonian Englishman whilst OV is reputed to be gypsy and a Hungarian.

webber
Guest

Cameron’s “meaningless” referendum has resulted in the UK leaving the EU.

Not, perhaps, to your taste, but not meaningless at all.

PALIKA
Guest

For the last time: both men are political manipulators and represent a form of low political life for which they both deserve to be judged harshly. But do not hold your breath.

Guest

Orbán used a lot of” big words” at the conference in Warsaw – wonder what Mrs Merkel thought about them.
Orbán’s four points at the summit of the Visegrád Four countries (Hungary, Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Poland) are:

security should be made a priority issue and a joint European army should be set up;
the central institutions of Europe, including the European Commission and the Council of Europe, should return to their original mandates;
the EU should keep its older and tried policies such as cohesion and common agricultural policy, but should not take migration and social issues to the European level;
regarding European economic policy, the EU should maintain its practices of strict budget discipline, structural transformation and economic stability.

http://www.portfolio.hu/en/economy/hungary_premier_makes_four_proposals_at_v4_conference.31749.html

wpDiscuz