Closing statements of activists Márton Gulyás and Gergő Varga

The following article and translation of the closing statements of Márton Gulyás and Gergő Varga, two arrested activists, originally appeared in the Budapest Sentinel. It is reprinted here with the permission of the news site’s editorial staff.

♦ ♦ ♦

The following are the closing statements made by Márton Gulyás and Gergő Varga at their trial on Thursday of April 13th, 2017.  The civil activists were arrested Monday night for throwing open bottles of orange paint at the Sándor Palace, the official residence and office of the President of Hungary, János Áder.

Earlier that day President Áder had signed the modified law on higher education adopted the previous week by the Fidesz-controlled parliament with virtually no debate, ignoring the advice of numerous constitutional experts and the wishes of some 70,000 demonstrators who had taken to the streets of Budapest in protest the previous evening.

“Lex CEU” contains provisions that would essentially force Budapest’s Central European University to close its doors.  The law was widely seen not so much as an attack on American financier and philanthropist George Soros, who founded CEU 25 years ago, but as an attack on academic freedom, prompting thousands to protest before the presidential palace Monday evening.

Gulyás was taken into custody at the demonstration, Varga at his home several hours later.  The two protestors were detained by police for 72 hours pending an accelerated trial ordered by the prosecutors. Charged with conspiring to “breach the peace” and “vandalize a landmark building” the two faced up to three years imprisonment if convicted.

Gulyás and Varga were sentenced to 300 and 200 hours of public work, respectively.  The Hungarian Civil Liberties Union called the verdict “absurd.”

Márton Gulyás

I’ll be brief because everyone is very tired. I would like to thank the members of the press for being here in such large numbers covering my case. Which is obviously not only my case, but without the press far fewer people would know what is happening in this country. I would like to thank my defense counsel for the speech he gave in my defense. Even I could not have said it better. Thank you. And I would also like to thank the prosecution for expressing so succinctly the charges against me, claiming that my actions amounted to disturbing the peace and public order in a defiantly anti-social and violent manner.

And now the court must decide whether this is what, in fact, happened. This is a question of legal interpretation. Though I am not a lawyer, allow me to address this as the question fundamentally is to what extent must the judicial authorities correlate or in some way coincide with society’s general sense of justice.  I am now of the view that it is not a bad thing if some correlation exists between the two. And I must say that in the event my actions really constituted disturbing the peace and public order in a defiant anti-social, violent manner, then I agree with the prosecutor that it is necessary to bring the provisions of criminal law to bear on my action. But in that case I would ask what society should do with its sense of justice which, for many years or even decades, has been continuously violated or when members of society continuously see various groups and individuals who in a provocative, anti-social manner abuse their power and misappropriate public property and other assets entrusted to them. And we can see that in these cases prosecutors never show the kind of proactive behavior that they did in my case.

I would like to emphasize that I am not saying that–in the event the court convicts me–my case can be compared to any other kinds of legal proceedings. That is not what I mean. I regard my case as different from those. I am merely saying that today’s event, and forgive me for the immodesty on my part, but I think that if I am convicted today and given a suspended sentence as proposed by the prosecutor and the court upholds it, it is a verdict on the whole judicial system. What will happen then? Will society’s sense of justice be satisfied with this decision? I dare say, and forgive me for my immodesty, that I don’t think that society’s sense of justice will be restored. It would be nice if it would be. If this sentence were enough to restore society’s sense of justice, then I would head for the Gyorskocsi Street or Markó Street jails and I would promise to stay there for the rest of my life in order for society’s sense of justice to be revived. If this is not going to happen, and I think it is not going to happen, what precedent is the prosecution setting by this judgment? The prosecution, I’ll say it again, that refuses even to investigate the various abuses of criminal organizations.

Representatives of newspapers are sitting here who write about these cases. Today we know about them because there is still a small group of independent journalists who write about the instances of VAT fraud amounting to billions, about the public tenders that are actually deceitful robberies which take place in broad daylight, and we could go on, but I do not want to continue because everybody knows what I’m talking about. People do read the media and learn about these cases.

So, my question is: Is it the court’s intention to prevent such things from happening? I agree with the prosecutors that it is not a good situation when citizens feel compelled to throw bottles of paint as a way of expressing their political opinions. We can agree that it is a bad situation. But will the situation be rectified, and will a dialogue-based, more democratic order result by convicting Gergő Varga and me, or by prosecutors doing their jobs and going after the really serious crimes which today limit the ability of citizens to exercise their basic rights? Those cases should be prosecuted which paralyze this state, paralyze this government, and render the most important public institutions the subject of public ridicule. But instead of ridicule one should feel despair.

So, I ask the court to consider very seriously when it comes to a decision on my case whether a conviction will really satisfy society’s sense of justice or whether a serious investigation by the prosecution of the real offenders will, as I assume, arrest the terrible dissatisfaction which exists among a broad segment of society. Because it is not by accident that 70,000 people take to the streets. You can make people believe on Echo TV, and on M1, even TV2 that the demonstrators were flown in from Prague, because the people have been misled, and obviously European public opinion, even American public opinion, as well as the various Nobel Prize winners and so on and so forth are all misled. You can make people believe this for a short time, but society is not an assembly of stupid people. They know perfectly well that today the power of the state does not serve their interests but propagates its own enrichment and power by robbing the people. And so I very politely ask the court and the prosecutors to rise to the seriousness and loftiness of their authority and kindly initiate the kinds of legal proceedings that will really eliminate what is harming the Hungarian people. That will bring the oppressors and exploiters of the Hungarian people here, where I am standing now. Because unfortunately I am not the one who constitutes a real threat to Hungarian society. The reason I say “unfortunately” is because if the restoration of public opinion really only depended on my case, then, believe me, I would be the happiest person around. But you know perfectly well that this is not the case. Thank you for listening.

Gergő Varga

I am not a lawyer. I would just like to say that I think that in a democracy our rights and freedoms do not exist merely because some etheric force guarantees them or because they are written down in the fundamental law, which in our case changes rather frequently especially considering it was carved in granite. In this way the freedom of speech is only guaranteed if we use it and if we test its limits. It is not free speech if we say it exists but we don’t use it. It’s like saying “you can be furious but don’t be furious.” In such exceptional cases, like the current one, the two of us, in addition to a third phantom demonstrator, felt that we needed to test the limits of free speech because public life has sunken to a level that can no longer be tolerated.

But all right, let’s accept the arguments of the prosecutor that our action was simply a breach of peace and vandalism, as though thousands of other people weren’t there and hundreds of policemen weren’t standing there that day, and as though tens of thousands of hitherto politically inactive protestors and police hadn’t been staring each other in the eye for the past week. The police would rather have gone home to their families to relax, but instead they were afraid that the crowd might attack them. I’m curious whether under such circumstances this was really just a simple breach of peace, or a simple act of vandalism, which to my knowledge does not generally merit locking up people for 72 hours who, for example, scribble “Russians go home” on landmark buildings, or whatever. Such people are not locked up for 72 hours or given an accelerated trial. The fact that prosecutors forcibly detained us has antagonized so many people that there were two sympathy demonstrations on our behalf. There are so many people present at this hearing that perhaps you are in breach of the peace, except that you are a state organization.

So far it has not been allowed to say that this country is a dictatorship. But what if it really is? Then what will we call it? They say that the expression of my political opinion was a breach of the peace. What will we call what comes later? If what we did is a breach of the peace and vandalism, and every other context does not count, then the basic tone of political expression in the future will be a breach of the peace, and everything else will only be worse. I do not mean that people will be afraid, but that if we criminalize the act of speaking out, then what will be next? Next week they will break up a demonstration because loud noise after 10 pm is not permissible? Will we use violence against a community to sentence Roma? Wait a minute, that has already happened. What is happening to this country? If this court convicts me here today, I will bear this proudly. What kinds of people observe laws that are passed against them?

April 15, 2017
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Guest

Nowadays I have very few reasons only to feel good in Hungary. Thank you Marci and thank you Gergő!

Jean-Paul
Guest

Tonight’s speech of Márton Gulyás at Szabadság tér was interesting too. It was maybe the first speech that I’ve seen (though there may have been others that I missed) that went further then the defence of a concrete cause (CEU or the NGO’s) and dealt with the political possibilities of using the present momentum to try to change the system and get rid of the Orbán regime. One can agree or not with his proposition (forcing the regime to introduce a fully proportional electoral system; in his view that would be enough to have a real change in the country), but at least it may be the beginning of a political discussion offered to all those who are protesting today and who, at the same time, do not accept the inept “opposition” parties of today. His organization -Közös Ország Klub-, or maybe Momentum, might represent the beginning of something positive and new in the country. Future will tell whether they will be able to bring about some real change or whether they will be just another short lived and unsuccessful initiative. Let’s hope for the first option…

Guest

” One can agree or not with his proposition (forcing the regime to introduce a fully proportional electoral system; in his view that would be enough to have a real change in the country)…”

A proportional electoral system is the only one I can agree about. If opposition parties don’t demand a proportional electoral system it may be because they themselves would like to be protected by an undemocratic electoral system in case they attain power. No tactical or practical consideration can outweigh the fundamental democratic nature of proportional representation.

webber
Guest

In addition to a need to change the electoral system (Eva likes D’Hondt, I like STV, partic. Hare-Clark), a need for checks and balances everywhere (incl. term limits), and a desperate need to change the constitution, I think the 2/3 threshold to change the constitution is far too low (once a normal constitution is in place).

Perhaps something along the lines of: Amendments of the constitution must be approved by at least 2/3 of Parliament and by referendum. Referenda for constitutional amendments must be held no sooner than three years after parliamentary approval, and no later than six years after parliamentary approval.

That way, the party in power will not be able to ride a wave of post-election popularity to get a referendum passed, there will be more than ample time for a thorough public debate on the amendment, and it is likely that any amendment will have more effect on subsequent governments than the one which proposed it.

Gabor Toka
Guest

Formal rules will never be enough to defend a country from dictatorship, and making a constitution particularly rigid has its considerable disadvantages. What may be more prudent is to invent ways of protecting media pluralism, judicial independence and a fair electoral system by far stronger means than the constitution itself.

But the requirement for a 2/3 majority alone would instantly become a far higher threshold than it is now if proportional representation was adopted. Just consider, parties that actually obtained 2/3 of the popular vote (or thereabout) would need to agree on the proposal rather than a manufactured legislative majority that only obtained just over 44 percent plus one or two defectors from Jobbik. And instead of a referendum you may want to require passage by two successive parliaments. Requiring referendums about constitutional rules have a poor historical record in serving democracy and the rule of law.

webber
Guest
Gábor Tóka, I vehemently disagree. What you say is a ridiculous commonplace that is refuted by the actual experience of strong checks and balances and of weak ones (2/3 was a very weak check). Look at all the checks Trump has had in the past couple of months. I do not say that any other country should copy the American system But answer me this: Could Orbán have done what he did if Hungary had had the American constitutional system? No, he could not. Categorically no. Indeed, he personally would not even be in power now (his second term in office would have ended in 2014). In 1992 I worked with an American political scientist who said, repeatedly, that the checks and balances in the Hungarian system were far too weak and too few, and that sooner or later a party would win a 2/3 majority on its own. He had no crystal ball, no visionary power. He simply knew that a wave of popularity for one party or revulsion against another would, sooner or later, inevitably bring such a result. And what did Hungarian political scientists say to him, in my presence (I was very young) – they respectfully… Read more »
petofi
Guest

Don’t be too sure about the efficacity of those checks and balances–for now, the Russians are going easy to make them appear to work. By the time they’re done, the only czechs will be the ones applying for a visa to go home…

Guest

Of course the two thirds condition is not enough by itself – but in combination with other measures it is very strong!

To get a two thirds majority in a proportional system is almost impossible.

And also if you have a two chamber system (Senate or Bundesrat in Germany, modeled on the US system) it gets difficult to push through extreme measures.

But Hungary’s (or rather Fidesz’) idea of lawmaking – “proposed today, voted on tomorrow, no discussion necessary” produces what I like to call:
A new law every day keeps sanity away!

Just remember how often the “constitution put in stone” had to be changed – it was really funny/crazy/absurd/you name it – reminded me strongly of “One flew over the cuckoo’s nest” …

wrfree
Guest

Poor Jack.. He never knew what hit him. The cards were stacked against him.

Re: those ‘checks and balances’

I’d think you can have all the ‘c’s and b’s in the world in a republic yet if the individuals ‘governing’ have a distinctly convoluted moral and ethical bent a country is doomed to the whims of their prevarication and mendaciousness.
Character of all, character of all is the deciding quality when working with so- called checks and balances. And sadly we can see the results of its omission in a number of current governments.

webber
Guest

So far, checks and balances seem to be working in Trump’s America, and nobody can tell me he didn’t believe being President was like being elected dictator for four years. He clearly really thought he could rule by decree, and ignore constitutional niceties. His outrage at every rebuttal is proof of that.

petofi
Guest

If the checks and balances had been working, Trump would never have made the 16…

wrfree
Guest

Old Chinese priverb…

‘Use power to curb power’

At botom perhaps the greatest Magyar dilemma.

Sorry but my English is getting

S

T

R

E

T

C

H

E

D

Jean-Paul
Guest
I agree that right now, having a proportional system might represent an important factor for the regime change (although, on the long range, it could be a key to paralysis and/or bad compromises, just look at the Netherlands or Israel, with their fully proportional system; but that’s something that could be considered at a later time). However, it’s a necessary, but certainly not sufficient condition. As long as Fidesz has basically total control over the media (media giving room to the opposition are few and concentrated on Budapest), not to speak of the total dependence of people in the countryside on the largely Fidesz mayors and other officials for their livelihood, you can have the best electoral system in the world, Fidesz will win. The problem is that Fidesz may accept a change in the electoral system, but will certainly not give up peacefully its domination on the media. And given that, the discussion below concerning what kind of system to create, what checks and balances etc is largely fictional, what’s needed is a credible strategy to make the Orbán regime diseappear. The proposition of Gulyás (or Momentum) can be a first and welcome step in that discussion, but it’s… Read more »
Guest

” …what’s needed is a credible strategy to make the Orbán regime diseappear.”

With Fidesz as vote counter there is no strategy that will make the Orbán regime disappear.

wrfree
Guest

Right now it’s pretty tough to see not only one but two recalcitrant and defiant regimes, Magyarorszag and N Korea strutting their stuff and challenging all strategists in trying to deal with them. Diplomacy appears to be mired helplessly in developing solutions. If there is a mighty ‘Solomon’ we don’t see it.

We walk in perilous times when
‘dialogue’ and ‘talks’ are euphemisms for blind bluster and where ‘action’ is the culmination of the straws which are breaking the camel’s back.

petofi
Guest

Both Magy and Kor are vassal states in service to their masters–Russia and China. Their role, primarily, is to be a thorn in the side of the modern, western world.

1956
Guest

@petofi: Both Magy and Kor are vassal states in service to their masters–Russia and China. Their role, primarily, is to be a thorn in the side of the modern, western world.

I hope that our brilliant Eva will adopt your words.

Guest

Hungary is more like a fly buzzing around and knocking against your window – inconvenient, but not really important …

Oszkár Dirlewanger
Guest

Now they will experience what real work and real “fascism” is.

Guest

Only in Hungary!

@Oszkar:
If this isn’t sarcasm …

I especially liked that sentence from the speech:

the fundamental law, which in our case changes rather frequently especially considering it was carved in granite

In a way it’s still funny how fast the Hungarian authorities can react when there’s something that they are really afraid of – a new law every day keeps sanity away …

But reality of course is depressing – and the signs of fascism and dictatorship are quite obvious!
To have someone like Bayer Zsolt (and numerous others, politicians as well as journalists) saying and writing their Nazi crap quite openly is horrendous!

wrfree
Guest

Messrs Gulyas and Varga kind of reminded me of the fellows who tarred and feathered the tax agents after the Boston Tea Party and the implementation of the Stamp Act.
It’s sure a statement of protest for some rather ‘intolerable’ acts perpetrated onto the nation. Time will tell if Magyar youth connects with these ‘sons of liberty’. They really are the only ones who can forge a new political path for the country.

petofi
Guest

@ wrfree

You want motivation from the Hungarian young? You must be kidding: the only thing that has moved them in the last 7 years was the internet tax…

András B. Göllner
Guest

Isn’t it interesting, that if you murder innocent Roma children, the Hungarian State waits for years to bring you to trial. If you engage in anti-Semitic hate speech, the State lets you wine and dine with the Prime Minister. If you defraud the State, like the CEO of Questor did, you get to sit at home, without a trial and live off the profits of your crime. But if you protest against the assault of the Orbán regime because it has trampled on the civil liberties of its people, you get accelerated treatment by the judiciary, and swift punishment.

Wondercat
Guest

“What kinds of people observe laws that are passed against them?”

Indeed. Civil disobedience, and acceptance of unjust punishment, and disobedience again, and punishment again, and thus forward.

It worked with Gandhi, with Martin Luther King. May Gulyás and Varga share their success.

petofi
Guest

Gandhi, King, et. al. were people with a backbone. Hungarians slither and have base appetites…

Member

There was an interview by 24.hu with Gulyás after his speech on the Saturdays’ demonstration.
He explained his movement, that aims for a change of the election rules before the elections.

For those, who understand hungarian language:

http://24.hu/belfold/2017/04/15/gulyas-mozgalmat-inditott-a-fidesz-ellen-es-az-elere-allt/

My hungaian language skills are still weak, I only understood roughly , what it was about.
Maybe someone of You might sum up essentials from the interview.

petofi
Guest

No need to understand it–it’s just pie-in-the-sky stuff.

Gabor Toka
Guest

Last night Varga and Gulyas gave a speech at Szabadsag ter at an anti-dictatorship demo. The footage is here: https://www.facebook.com/slejmpolitika/videos/1804720119855890/ From 15:00 onwards Gulyas issues the plea for the introduction of PR

Member

The fascists are not going to voluntarily give up control. Orban is a dictator, dictators don`t risk true democracy.

Do democrats believe the next election will be free and fair? If not, then boycott is the only answer

Observer
Guest

Nobody on the democratic side believes that the next elections will be fair (for the lack of Monday any media on the demo side) or completely free (for the coercion or limited repression against the opposition, particularly in the countryside).
Simply there is no choice – the democratic side either participates in unfair and not so free election, or allows the dictatorship a free ride.

Observer
Guest

.. for the lack of money..

Ferenc
Guest

OK, so that’s the current situation/starting point of the election campaign. BUT are there possibilities to make things less unfair? For what is all that Fidesz money used mostly?
One of the main problems is the current public/state media. Are these possibilities to change anything there:
-what are their official requirements regarding fair reporting and fair presentation?
-which authority is controlling if these requirements are met?
-if not met (which is very obviously the case), what can be done about this acc.Hungarian laws?
-if nothing is and/or can be done, what are the possibilities from outside of Hungary (e.g.from the side of the EU) to require and provide a fairplay of public/state media?
-how far would foreign/EU intervention in the public/state media influence the Hungarian voters?

Observer
Guest

Ferenc

– The central electoral commission will be staffed with Fid stooges although the opposition will have observers.
– Protests from polling stations will go the CEC and then to court.
– Nothing good can be done re the electoral law, Fid tailored them and may still change something, e.g. in 2014 there were new rules restricting the use of media (while Fid used the state media as their their own).
– the EU etc may criticize, but can’t do much else to affect the results post factum. Kicking Fid out of the EPP won’t count much internally.

The only effective thing EU could is to suspend/cut the cohesion etc funds and investigate the corruption cases, but I doubt it will happen beyond a couple of glaring ones.
This battle (2018) has to be fought by Hungarians.

Ferenc
Guest

“while Fid used the state media as their their own”
So the main questions are:
What can seriously be done against that?
What are the legal obligattions/requirements to the public/state media?
And if these are not kept, what can be done?

az angol beteg
Guest

Nothing.
Nothing.
Hope that helps.

Observer
Guest

The court proceedings were severely flowed, according to the TAS defense lawyer: e.g. witnesses heard each other testimonies, the political demonstration nature of the act was not taken into account.

When nine years ago the Orban led group of MPs, defying the police, dismantled the simple security fence around parliament, using tools to cut links, the court ruled that although the crime was nominally committed, it had the motivation of a political demonstration, thus posing no danger to society, hence no punishment was meted out.

Now the court did not consider the political motivation element, although it was explicitly acknowledged and emphasized by the defendants themselves, and sentenced the defendants to a substantial punishment.

Guest

Just found this in the Guardian:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/apr/15/dirty-tricks-demonise-george-soros
In Hungary, Viktor Orbán’s self-proclaimed illiberal democracy is threatening the Soros-funded Central European University. Its president, the former Canadian Liberal party leader and former Observer columnist Michael Ignatieff, is bewildered. He protests that he is running a university, not an opposition political party that might take Orbán’s power away.
And there are examples from other “illiberal states” too – it’s all the fault of Soros!

These right wing lunatics are unbelievable!
Steve Bannon’s Breitbart says Soros’s funding of Black Lives Matter was part of an agenda to swing the US presidential election.
Stupidity/idiocy knows no bounds as Einstein is supposed to have said.

e-1956
Guest

Let us be objective. The Clintons and Obamas have also applied many dirty tricks to win.

Why would we blame only Trump for the same things?

Istvan
Guest
Wolfi Black Lives Matter (BLM) has a legitimate complaint about the use of deadly force by the police in some cities, Chicago where I am right now for one. The US Department of Justice issued a very critical report on the Chicago Police Department which can be read at https://www.justice.gov/opa/file/925846/download George Soros through the open society foundation however did not give money to BLM, its records on its grants are public. Currently the US Department of Justice under the Trump administration is no longer attempting to reduce the police killings of African Americans via training and enforceable orders. US. police killed at least 258 black people in 2016, according to a project by the Guardian newspaper that tracks police killings in America. Of these only 39 were unarmed. Over all in 2016 police killed 1,155 people in the USA and about 135 police were killed while on duty. I believe the USA has 16 times the gun crimes of Hungary per 100,000 residents in the average year. As I said before on this blog the USA is a cowboy nation and the number of gun crimes is very high, so I am sure the Soros foundation is concerned about this. The… Read more »
Guest

Istvan, I remember very well my shock when I heard about this more than thirty years ago on my first (business!) trip to the USA – we were talking to a black salesman at IBM in Raleigh, NC (The famous Research Triangle) and he was quite open about racism and his fears. He had a BMW motorcycle, was very proud of it, but also told us he was very careful – police would believe that a black guy with money had to be a drug dealer …
A black computer specialist? No way!

That was totally different from reading about it, where you think – well, writers like to overdo it a bit …
But hearing it from this straight talking guy!

Guest

A bit OT:
“Jupiter’s Moon,” the latest movie of Hungarian director Kornél Mundruczó, has been invited to take part in the main competition of the 70th Cannes Film Festival in May, according to a press release sent to the Budapest Business Journal.
http://bbj.hu/culture/hungarian-movie-to-compete-for-palme-dor-in-cannes-_131588
Why do I mention this:
In the Europe of our ages, amidst such life-changing situations as the refugee crisis, we have no compass for making the appropriate decisions. I am the most interested in whether there is a mutual belief that could tie us together. Is there salvation? What can give us hope in the worst of times?” – Mundruczó says about his movie.

I don’t know anything else about the movie – but I’m sure Fidesz won’t like it …
So watch out!

LwiiH
Guest

OT also… Just saw two Hungarian made films, allampolgar was very well done and I’d On Body and Soul a big two thumbs up. Allampolgar really was an awful story about how a “normal” immigrant was treated. The way the current regime thinks I’m not sure they’d be upset with it as it clearly sends the message, come here and this is what awaits you. Anyways, it’s drama and it doesn’t correlate well with my experiences.

Member

I was at the opening of the movie “1945” tonight.

This is a powerful movie, director Török mixes the atmosphere of “Once upon a Time in the West” (1968, Sergio Leone) and “The Shop on Main Street (1965, Ján Kadár).

Highly recommended. I doubt it will be shown on state television under Orban.

petofi
Guest

I just saw a documentary on Hitler’s rise to power in 1932/3.
It’s remarkable how similar was the electioneering style of Hitler and Trump…

Tappanch
Guest

Erdogan had to use fraud to reach 51% in the referendum that legalizes his dictatorship. One of the method was that his election commission declared the stampless, non-validated ballots valid AFTER the ballot boxes were closed.

Member

It is obvious that the elections will not be free with the current composition of the election authorities in Hungary either (Election Bureau: Fidesz appointees, Election Commission: more than 2/3 Fidesz majority.

The revealing time series about the Turkish referendum.

Opened boxes % —–> No = against Erdogan %

25.0% —–> 36.8%
32.0% —–> 38.7%
40.2% —–> 40.6%
51.1% —–> 42.5%
61.4% —–> 44.0%
70.9% —–> 45.2%
80.9% —–> 46.4%
90.0% —–> 47.6%
95.0% —–> 48.63%

Member

Angela Merkel’s Chief of Staff Peter Altmaier said the close outcome for Turkey’s constitutional referendum shows there is “lively political debate” in the country. This says all.

In the last 9 months, 47,000 people were put in jail officially, including lots of members of the judiciary. “lively political debate”

Member

Turkish vote abroad.

In the Netherlands: No: 30.1%,
in Germany, No: 36.8%
in USA, No: 83.3%

Member

comment image

Member

The dean of the ELTE Law School, who was close to president Madl and Orban himself, condemns Orban’s attacks against the CEU and his other education policies as ell:

https://www.facebook.com/miklos.kiraly.754/posts/1477653015619500

wpDiscuz