Final country tables clean versions - Europa



HU – Country information

Indicators on political participation

of persons with disabilities

2014

DISCLAIMER: The background country information reports contain background material for the comparative report on The right to political participation for persons with disabilities: human rights indicators by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA). The bulk of the information in the background country information reports comes from ad hoc information reports prepared under contract by the FRA’s research network FRANET. The views expressed in the background country information reports do not necessarily reflect the views or the official position of the FRA. These reports are made publicly available for information purposes only and do not constitute legal advice or legal opinion.

FRANET contractor: Hungarian Helsinki Committee

I. STRUCTURE INDICATORS

|Structure indicators |Source and supporting information |

|Has [country] ratified the CRPD without a reservation to | |

|Article 29? Please give details of any reservation. |20 Jul 2007[1] |

|Has [country] ratified the CRPD without a reservation to |20 Jul 2007[2] |

|Article 12? Please give details of any reservation. | |

|Has [country] ratified the CRPD without a reservation to |20 Jul 2007[3] |

|Article 9? Please give details of any reservation. | |

|Please indicate the legislation which applies to European |European Parliament and municipal elections: |

|Parliament and municipal elections in your country. Please |the Fundamental Law of Hungary;[4] |

|highlight possible amendments in view of the 2014 European |Act XXXVI of 2013 on the Election Procedure[5] (hereafter referred to as: Election Procedure Act); |

|Parliament elections. |Act L of 2010 on the Election of Local Municipality Representatives and Mayors;[6] |

| |Act CXIII of 2003 on the Election of Members of the European Parliament;[7] |

|Does the same law apply for national, federal, local and |Act CLXXIX of 2011 on the Rights of Nationalities.[8] |

|regional elections, and referendums? | |

| |There is no information indicating planned amendments in view of the 2014 European Parliament elections. 2014 will also be a year for national |

| |elections in Hungary. |

| | |

| |Different laws apply to the different (local, national, EP) elections as far as e.g. the number of MPs, the voting system, the conditions for |

| |setting up a party list, etc. is concerned. |

| | |

| |However, the Election Procedure Act applies to all kinds of elections as far as procedural rules are concerned. |

| | |

| |Referenda: |

| |Act CCXXXVIII of 2013[9] regulates the local and national referendum initiatives, the European citizens’ initiative and the referendum process.|

| |The law enters into force on the day of setting the 2014 parliamentary elections. The law shall apply on local referendum process from the 1st |

| |of October 2014. |

|Is there a requirement under law to register to vote? If |Data of voters having an address in Hungary are added automatically to the central electoral register on the basis of national registry for |

|so, please specify the relevant legislation. |personal data and address, with the exception of persons who are excluded from voting. |

| |Thus there is no separate requirement to register to vote for the municipal, national and the European Parliament elections. The same applies |

| |to citizens of EU Member States with a residence in Hungary regarding the municipal elections, however, with regard to EP elections they have |

| |to declare whether they want to vote in Hungary or not.[10] |

| |However, Hungarian citizens without a Hungarian residence will be able to vote for party lists on the national elections in 2014, only if they |

| |register to vote separately beforehand.[11] |

| |Furthermore, Hungarian citizens with a residence in Hungary shall declare separately if they want to participate in the national elections as |

| |“minority voters”[12] in order to be able to vote on the (national) “minority list”– set up optionally by the national minority |

| |self-governments – instead of a party list. In case a citizen is registered as a minority voter (i.e. he/she belongs to the enumerated 13 |

| |minorities which are recognized by the Hungarian law as “nationalities”).[13], he/she may only vote for an “ordinary” national party list in |

| |the lack of a minority list. In Hungary, citizens having residence in the country may vote for an individual candidate and for a party |

| |list.[14] |

|Is there any limitation foreseen by law which could affect |The Fundamental Law[15] in its Article XIII (6) stipulates that “Those disenfranchised by a court for a criminal offence or limited mental |

|the right of persons with disabilities to vote in European |capacity shall not have the right to vote and to be voted for. Citizens of another Member State of the European Union with residence in Hungary|

|Parliament and municipal elections? Please give details of |shall not have the right to be voted for if they have been excluded from the exercise of this right in their State pursuant a legal regulation,|

|any restrictions on the right to vote of persons with |a court decision or an authority decision of their State” |

|disabilities, including any link between a particular type | |

|of impairment (e.g. psychosocial/intellectual disability) |Thus, rather than providing for an automatic linkage between guardianship and disenfranchisement, as the previous constitution and regime did, |

|or substituted decision making (e.g. loss of legal |the current one requires courts to rule separately on the ability to vote in the case of persons with mental health problems or intellectual |

|capacity, placement under guardianship)and the right to |disabilities, as also set out explicitly by Article 13/A (1) of the Election Procedure Act. |

|vote in elections. | |

|Does the same law regarding voting rights apply for |The Election Procedure Act provides under Article 13/A that in any decision placing a person under guardianship, the court must decide on the |

|national, local/regional elections and referendums? |person’s right to vote, and should exclude from suffrage adult persons whose mental ability to exercise the right to vote is either lastingly |

| |diminished or periodically significantly diminished due to their psychological state, intellectual diminution or addiction; or is completely |

| |absent due to their psychological state or intellectual diminution. While the adoption of this provision somewhat clarifies for courts on how |

| |to determine whether a citizen under guardianship should retain his/her voting rights, according to Hungarian Civil Liberties Union (Társaság a|

| |szabadságjogokért) two key problems remain. The experts’ objection that courts lack corresponding expertise and in practice would be unlikely |

| |to make an effort to thoroughly investigate such matters would still apply, as would the objection that the exclusion grounds are contrary to |

| |international law.[16] |

| | |

| |Additionally, under Article 13/A (4) of the Election Procedure Act those who are entitled to request the termination of the guardianship |

| |regarding a certain person (i.e. the person concerned; his/her spouse, registered partner, linear relative, sibling or guardian; the wardship |

| |authority; or the prosecutor[17]) may separately also request from the court that the exclusion from suffrage is terminated regarding the |

| |(adult) person concerned. |

| | |

| |Under Article13/A (3) of the Election Procedure Act persons deprived of their legal capacity regarding issues other than voting (e.g. |

| |concluding contracts, making decisions concerning health care), i.e. those under guardianship but not excluded from suffrage may vote |

| |personally and may make valid legal statements related to voting independently, thus may access general redress mechanisms independently, |

| |without their guardians. |

|Is there legislation in place regulating how people living |Under the Election Procedure Act, people living in long-term institutions may vote via “mobile ballot boxes”. (This possibility was also |

|in long-term institutions may vote? |provided for by the earlier legislation, Act C of 1997 on Election Procedure.) |

| |Under Articles 103 and 104 of the Election Procedure Act, voters hindered by their state of health, disability, or detention shall be included |

| |in a list for those voting via mobile ballot boxes upon their request. |

| |According to Article 104 (1) the list is drawn up by the local election offices as a main rule. |

| |Under Article 103 (2) requests shall reach the local election offices no later than two days before the election day or shall reach the local |

| |ballot counting committee on the day of the election no later than 3 p.m. In the latter case, the local ballot counting committee includes the |

| |voter in the list on the day of the election.[18] |

| |The request for a mobile ballot box shall include the voter’s name, place and date of birth, his/her mother’s name, his/her identification |

| |number, and his/her place of residence where he/she wants to vote in case it differs from the voter’s registered address. Furthermore, the |

| |request shall indicate the reason for requesting a mobile ballot box.[19] There is no legal rule indicating that voters should prove their |

| |disability in any way or should prove a certain level of disability to be included in the list. |

| |According to Article 185 (3) of the Election Procedure Act, the secrecy of the voting shall be maintained also in the course of voting via a |

| |mobile ballot box, and under Article 88 c) of the Election Procedure Act voters living with visual impairment may request to use a voting aid |

| |with Braille writing while voting via a mobile ballot box. |

|Is there a duty under law to provide reasonable |According to the current regulation section 61 (3) of the Election Procedure Act states that ‘In order to make it possible for them to vote, |

|accommodation for persons with disabilities in voting |voters hindered from movement shall be, at their request, visited by at least two members of the ballot counting committee, within the ballot |

|procedures? For example, is there a duty to provide |counting committee’s jurisdiction, with a mobile ballot-box, and in case they wish to vote with a certificate, enter them in the register.’ |

|assistance at the polling station (e.g. braille or large | |

|print ballot papers, independent support person to assist |Furthermore, section 68 (2) provides ‘Voters who cannot read, or are prevented from voting by other physical handicap or any other cause, may |

|with voting chosen by the person with a disability) or to |use the assistance of another voter, for lack of same, the joint assistance of two members of the ballot counting committee.’ |

|allow for alternative means of voting (e.g. postal ballots,| |

|voting in advance, home-based voting, voting at | |

|institutions, mobile voting)? | |

|Is there a duty under law for public and private providers |There is no specific provision stating that internet and web-based public information shall be accessible, but related provisions may be found |

|of internet and web-based information to ensure that public|in various laws. It is to be noted that no national law refers to any particular web accessibility standard, only the general requirement of |

|information is subject to accessibility requirements (e.g. |accessibility is prescribed. |

|equivalent to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) |According to the Equal Treatment Act,[20] both public and private service providers are obliged to comply with the criteria of equal treatment |

|2.0 AA standard) |also with respect to persons with disabilities. |

| |The Disability Act[21] stipulates under Article 6 that access to public information and information on the rights of and services provided to |

| |disabled persons shall be accessible on an equal basis with others for persons with disabilities, whereas Article 7/A (1) sets out that access |

| |to public services shall be provided on an equal basis with others, as provided for by the Disability Act, and taking into account the diverse |

| |special needs of groups of persons with disabilities. |

| |In this regard, Article 4 hc) of the Disability Act sets out that the information shall be regarded as accessible if it is predictable, |

| |understandable and perceptible for everyone, in particular, for persons limited in their mobility or in their visual, hearing, mental or |

| |communication functions, and if acquiring it is accessible. |

| |Furthermore, according to Article 9 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, promulgated by Hungary in 2007,[22] State |

| |Parties shall take appropriate measures to ensure to persons with disabilities access, on an equal basis with others to information and |

| |communications, including information and communications technologies and systems, and to other facilities and services open or provided to the|

| |public. |

|Is there a duty under law for public and private providers |The Media Act,[23] which was adopted in 2010 and entered into force after the last municipal and European Parliamentary elections, and which |

|of media (including newspapers, TV, radio and internet) to |applies to media services and press products provided and published by media content providers settled in Hungary, sets out under article 39 |

|ensure that their information and communications are |that media content providers for audio-visual media services shall make efforts to gradually make their programmes accessible to people with |

|subject to accessibility requirements? |impaired hearing. |

| | |

| |Public and – in respect of their media services with the highest annual average audience share – private “linear media” service providers[24] |

| |(this stands for the traditional radio and TV channels) with significant market power are obliged to ensure that all announcements of public |

| |interest, political advertisements, news programmes (including traffic news, sports news and weather forecasts) and political programmes, as |

| |well as programmes about people with disabilities or equal opportunities, are accessible through Hungarian subtitles – for example through |

| |teletext – or through sign language.[25] |

| | |

| |Furthermore, the providers above are obliged to ensure that cinematographic works, games and programmes serving public service objectives, |

| |provided between 06.00 and 24.00, are also accessible through Hungarian subtitles or sign language (for at least six hours on each calendar day|

| |in 2012; for at least eight hours on each calendar day in 2013; for at least ten hours on each calendar day in 2014; and throughout the whole |

| |airtime from 2015 on). |

| | |

| |On the basis of Resolution 1601/2011. (XI. 9.) of the Media Council (Médiatanács), the National Media and Infocommunications Authority (Nemzeti|

| |Média- és Hírközlési Hatóság) regularly supervises the fulfilment of the above obligations by the six largest television broadcasts, with the |

| |help of a web-based program and seven deaf or hearing impaired staff members.[26] |

| | |

| |In its recent report[27] the National Media and Infocommunications Authority stated that the media service providers’ practice as far as |

| |accessibility is concerned had improved; the ratio of programmes with subtitles had increased; however, the quality of the subtitles had not |

| |always been satisfactory. The media service providers were also criticised because the correction of failures indicated in the earlier reports |

| |was too slow. Neither the specialized report nor the annual reports of the National Media and Infocommunications Authority for 2012, 2011 and |

| |2010 refer to or contain any information on related complaints. |

| |As to other types of disabilities, no further accessibility requirement is provided for with respect to the media services. |

| |Finally, there are no explicit regulations in place concerning the obligation of subtitling in minority (“nationality”) languages. Article 99 |

| |(1) of the Media Act only prescribes that all nationalities recognised by Hungary are entitled to support and sustain their culture and mother |

| |tongue, and to be regularly informed in their mother tongue by way of separate programmes aired through public media service. |

|Is there legislation requiring that polling stations and |The Election Procedure Act, which entered into force on the 3d o May 2013, provides under Article 166 that in each of the voting districts of |

|voting processes be accessible to persons with disabilities|every settlement there must be at least one fully accessible polling station. |

|(e.g. a certain percentage of polling stations must be | |

|accessible, one polling station per electoral district must|Furthermore, Article 88 d) provides that voters living with disabilities may request to vote at an accessible polling station, while Article 88|

|be accessible etc.)? |c) sets out that they may also request to use a voting aid with Braille writing. The information note delivered to voters will contain also |

| |information on the accessibility of the polling station (Article 115 (3) f)). |

|Please indicate whether the legislation requires that | |

|polling stations and voting processes are accessible for |If a person requests to vote at an accessible polling station and the polling station where he/she should vote is not accessible, the voters’ |

|all persons with disabilities or for particular impairment |list will be re-arranged in a way that he/she will be entitled to vote at an accessible polling station in the same voting district. |

|groups (e.g. persons with visual, hearing, physical | |

|impairments etc.). |Article 181 (1) provides that if a voter is illiterate or lives with physical disabilities that constitute a burden in practicing voting |

| |rights, he/she may receive support form a person he/she has chosen, or from two members of the local ballot counting committee. |

|Does the law foresee training for election authorities and |According to Section 75 (e) of the Act on the Election Procedure, the election offices organize the training of electoral bodies. This is |

|election officials on non-discrimination on the grounds of |managed by the National Election Office. In addition, the law does not foresee any training for election officials. However, the National |

|disability, accessibility and reasonable accommodation? |Election Office (Nemzeti Választási Iroda, NVI) will prepare training materials for election officials, covering guidance on how to support |

| |persons living with disabilities throughout the voting procedure. The district election offices will train the heads of the local election |

| |offices, whereas the heads of the local election offices will be responsible for the training of members of the local ballot counting |

| |committees. The training materials are available on the following website: training materials |

| |for the 2014 elections are not available yet on the website.[28] |

|Does the national strategy/action plan on disability cover |Hungary has both a National Disability Programme for the period 2007-2013[29] as well as short-term plans relating to part of the time covered |

|the right to political participation of persons with |by the National Disability Programme. The action plan for implementation of the National Disability Programme in 2012–2013[30]contained only |

|disabilities? |one task related to the right to civil and political participation of persons with disabilities, namely that the website of the Parliament, |

| |central administration, Constitutional Court courts, self-governments etc. were to be accessible by 30 September 2013. |

|Are all persons with disabilities, including those who have|Under Article13/A (3) of the Election Procedure Act persons deprived of their legal capacity regarding issues other than voting (e.g. |

|been deprived of their legal capacity, able to access |concluding contracts, making decisions concerning health care), i.e. those under guardianship but not excluded from suffrage may vote |

|redress and complaint mechanisms in cases where they have |personally and may make valid legal statements related to voting independently, thus may access general redress mechanisms independently, |

|not been able to exercise the right to vote? |without their guardians. |

| |If a person with disability is unable to vote due to a discriminatory measure falling under the scope of the Equal Treatment Act, he/she may |

| |turn to the Equal Treatment Authority (Egyenlő Bánásmód Hatóság)[31] or may file a civil law claim to the court.[32] |

| |Furthermore, disabled persons may also rely on general redress mechanisms ensured by the Election Procedure Act, claiming the violation of laws|

| |pertaining to the elections or the fundamental principles of the elections and the election procedure.[33] |

II. PROCESS INDICATORS

|Process indicators |Source and supporting information |

|Are there mechanisms in place to ensure that disabled |Act CXXXI of 2010 on Social Participation in Preparing Laws[34] provides for public consultation about laws before their submission to the |

|people’s organisations (DPOs) are consulted and involved |Parliament. |

|in the development of laws and policies in electoral |However, according to Article 1, the above law shall be applied only to draft Bills and decrees prepared by the Ministers, i.e. ministerial and|

|matters? Please give details of the mechanisms through |Government Bills, thus Bills of Members of Parliament and parliamentary committees are not covered. |

|which DPOs are involved. |According to Article 5 (3), in case of certain issues – e.g. draft Bills on the central budget and its implementation or on establishing a new |

| |institution or body – involving the public is not obligatory and under Article 5 (4) the drafts shall not be consulted upon if that would |

| |“endanger” various interests of the country. A further exception is included in Article 5 (5), which stated that if adopting a law in an urgent|

| |manner is of particular public interest, consultation is not obligatory either. |

| |Under Article 8 (1)-(2), consultation shall always include publishing the draft Bills on the web, allowing for the submission of any opinion |

| |via e-mail (“general consultation”), which option is available for everyone, including DPOs. Another form of public consultation is targeted |

| |(“direct”) consultation, which includes setting up strategic partnership with NGOs, churches, universities, etc. (The law does not contain any |

| |list as to the acts which require targeted consultation, thus the use of targeted consultation is discretionary. Strategic partnership |

| |agreements shall contain the issues regarding which the given strategic partner shall be consulted.[35]) |

| |However, the available list of strategic partners, listing 47 stakeholders, does not include any DPOs.[36] It may be added at this point that |

| |under the current government the pace of legislation has been very fast, and deadlines set for commenting in the framework of “general |

| |consultation” were often very tight, sometimes only a few days, which meant that the limited time sometimes restricted the possibilities of the|

| |consultation[37]. |

| |This was possible because Article 10 (1) of Act CXXXI of 2010 on Social Participation in Preparing Laws only says that the draft Bills shall be|

| |published in a way that there is “adequate time” to assess the draft, to express related opinions and to assess the opinions submitted. |

| |Furthermore, the number of Bills submitted by MPs or parliamentary committees, which are, as pointed out above, not subject to mandatory |

| |consultation process, has significantly risen under the current government, and e.g. the new constitution and several “cardinal” laws (laws |

| |requiring a 2/3 majority) were tabled as Bills of individual MPs.[38] |

| |The Hungarian Association of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (Siketek és Nagyothallók Országos Szövetsége, SINOSZ) submitted that they did not |

| |participate in the legislative processes before 2009, but they were consulted regarding the election procedure after the (local and national) |

| |elections in 2010 and also commented on the draft of the Election Procedure Act.[39] |

| |The Hungarian Federation of the Blind and Partially Sighted (Magyar Vakok és Gyengénlátók Országos Szövetsége, MVGYOSZ) submitted that, |

| |according to their knowledge, there has been no public consultation regarding the political participation of persons with disabilities since |

| |2008, and they have not commented on related draft legislation.[40] |

| |According to the information provided by the National Federation of Disabled Persons’ Associations (Mozgáskorlátozottak Egyesületeinek Országos|

| |Szövetsége, MEOSZ), who is also the co-chair of the National Disability Council (Országos Fogyatékosügyi Tanács), within the framework of the |

| |National Disability Council they commented on information materials regarding the (local and national) elections in 2010, and were consulted |

| |regarding accessibility requirements in 2009. |

| |Under the former government (between 2006 and 2010) consultations took place in order to grant voting rights to mentally disabled persons |

| |having limited legal capacity, but under the new government (since 2010) these consultations stopped and no results were achieved. They also |

| |submitted that they did not comment on the draft of the Election Procedure Act and that the current government does not maintain any |

| |consultation mechanisms with DPOs, neither directly, neither through the National Disability Council.[41] |

|Have national judicial redress mechanisms considered any |Official data is not available.[42] |

|cases related to the right to political participation of | |

|persons with disabilities? | |

|Please give details of relevant case law and any available| |

|data on the number of such cases. | |

|Have national non-judicial redress mechanisms (e.g. |An NGO initiated an actio popularis case before the Equal Treatment Authority in 2011 against a local municipality, claiming that a local |

|National Human Rights Institutions, Equality Bodies, |polling station was not accessible for persons with disabilities. The case ended in a friendly settlement between the municipality and the NGO.|

|Ombuds institutions) considered any cases related to the |The municipality undertook that the public institution maintained by the municipality in which the polling station was placed will be made |

|right to political participation of persons with |accessible. |

|disabilities? | |

|Please give details of relevant case law and any available|The information provided by the Equal Treatment Authority does not specify whether the complaint concerned the national or the municipal |

|data on the number of such cases. |elections, but since in 2010 both national and municipal elections were held, it is reasonable to assume that the same polling stations were |

| |used in the course of both of the elections. |

| | |

| |There is no official reference; the friendly settlement was not published. [43] |

| | |

| |In 2009, the former Parliamentary Commissioner for Civil Rights[44] (állampolgári jogok országgyűlési biztosa) initiated an ex officio |

| |investigation and published a report (OBH-2405/2009[45]) on problems regarding access to information and accessibility of polling stations for |

| |the European Parliament elections and the exclusion of persons with mental disabilities under guardianship from suffrage. |

| | |

| |The report concluded that election procedures, facilities and information materials were not accessible for persons with physical or |

| |intellectual disabilities, which violated the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.[46] |

| | |

| |There is no information indicating that the report resulted directly in any policy measures, etc. The reasoning of the Election Procedure Act |

| |(drafted after the report of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Civil Rights was issued) does not refer to the report. |

| | |

| |In 2011, six Hungarian citizens with intellectual disability brought their complaint to the UN CRPD Committee[47] after having been unable to |

| |vote in 2010 in the parliamentary and municipal elections. Indeed under a provision of the Constitution applicable at the time of the |

| |complaint[48], all persons under guardianship were automatically excluded from voting. Hungary changed its constitution in 2012, and the |

| |current Fundamental Law[49] now requires judges to make a decision on suffrage based on an individual assessment (as mentioned [previously). |

| | |

| |However, the CRPD Committee[50] found that this was still in breach of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: “Article 29 |

| |does not foresee any reasonable restriction, nor does it allow any exception for any groups of persons with disabilities” […] “Therefore, an |

| |exclusion of the right to vote on the basis of a perceived or actual psychosocial or intellectual disability, including a restriction pursuant |

| |to an individualized assessment, constitutes discrimination on the basis of disability.” |

| | |

| |The CRPD Committee said that Hungary was obliged to reinstate the six complainants on the electoral roll, and recommended to prevent similar |

| |violations by considering repealing an article in the Hungarian Fundamental Law[51] and also an article in the Transitional Provisions to the |

| |Fundamental Law[52] that are contrary to the CRPD Convention. |

| | |

| |The CRPD Committee called on Hungary to enact laws that recognize the right to vote for all persons with disabilities without any “capacity |

| |assessment”, “and provide for adequate assistance and reasonable accommodation”. |

|Is information about how and where to complain in the case|Information on complaint mechanisms under the Election Procedure Act is available on the website valasztas.hu of the National Election |

|of problems with exercising the right to political |Office in a format partly accessible for visually impaired.[53] |

|participation accessible to all persons with disabilities?|The website of the Equal Treatment Authority egyenlobanasmod.hu is accessible for visually impaired persons, and the Equal Treatment |

| |Authority also issued information notes written in Braille.[54] There are no other forms of accessibility to information. |

III. OUTCOME INDICATORS

|Outcome indicators |Source and supporting information |

|What was the voter turnout rate for persons with |No official data is recorded concerning the voter turnout of persons with disabilities.[55] |

|disabilities in the most recent municipal elections and in|In the municipal elections in 2010 the general turnout rate of was 46.64%,[56] while in the European Parliament elections the general turnout |

|the 2009 European Parliament elections? How does this |rate was 36.31%.[57] |

|compare with the voter turnout rate among the general |In the national election in 2010, the general turnout rate was 64.38% at the first and 46.66 % at the second round.[58] |

|population? | |

| | |

|What was the voter turnout rate for persons with | |

|disabilities in the most recent national elections? How | |

|does this compare with the voter turnout rate among the | |

|general population? | |

|How many members of the current national parliament |Due to the Hungarian data protection rules, the number of MPs living with disabilities is not registered officially. |

|identify as having a disability? |However, based on media sources and DPO submissions some MPs have a disability, such as Dr. Gergely Tapolczai [59] , President of the |

| |SINOSZ[60]; Ferenc Hirt [61] who gave an interview (titled “The first wheelchair user MP in the Hungarian Parliament”)[62] and dr. Katalin |

| |Szili who gave an interview in 2005 (titled “Katalin Szili first spoke about her disability”).[63] She often served as keynote speaker or host|

| |of events related to disability issues, e.g. the “Parliament Day of Persons with Disabilities”.[64] |

|How many members of current municipal governments identify|Due to the Hungarian data protection rules, the number of municipality representatives living with disabilities is not registered officially. |

|as having a disability? |Following the MEOSZ, two mayors of small settlements and five members of municipal governments are living with moderate physical |

| |disabilities.[65] |

|What proportion of polling stations is accessible for |Currently there are 10397 polling stations in Hungary. 5094 polling stations can be reached barrier-free. The additional terms of barrier-free |

|persons with disabilities? Please indicate whether polling|voting (e.g. polling booth accessible by wheel chair, table of sufficient height, etc.) are provided by the local election office before the |

|stations are accessible for all persons with disabilities |polling day. |

|or for particular impairment groups e.g. persons with |It is to be noted that the new Election Procedure Act provides under Article 166 that in each of the voting districts of every settlement there|

|visual, hearing, physical impairments etc.) |must be at least one fully accessible polling station. |

|Does the website to provide instructions for voting and |The Hungarian Federation of the Blind and Partially Sighted (Magyar Vakok és Gyengénlátók Országos Szövetsége, MVGYOSZ) approached the IT |

|information on candidates run by the ministry responsible |Foundation for the Visually Impaired (Informatika a Látássérültekért Alapítvány), which analysed the website providing instructions on |

|for organising elections meet accessibility standards |elections.[66] According to the IT Foundation for the Visually Impaired the website of the National Election Office (valasztas.hu) does not|

|(e.g. equivalent to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines |meet the standards of WCAG 2.0 AA. Moreover, a complete accessibility audit would be necessary to reveal all mistakes and assess compliance |

|(WCAG) 2.0 AA standard)? |even with the A standard.[67] |

| |According to the IT Foundation for the Visually Impaired, the largest mistake is that the accessibility for visually impaired is ensured under |

| |a different website using the yellow-black scheme which is not accessible to all blind and visually impaired persons. Furthermore, the |

| |“accessible” version of the website contains only summaries on the previous elections. The list of further deficiencies includes e.g. missing |

| |ALT attributes, missing tags on pdf documents, and deficiencies regarding title tags. The National Election Office affirmed the above opinion |

| |by stating that its website only partially meets WCAG 2.0 standards.[68] |

|What proportion of main public and/or private television |According to the information provided by the National Election Office, television spots prepared by the National Election Office for the |

|broadcasts providing instructions for voting and |European Parliament, national and local elections in 2009 and 2010 had Hungarian subtitles.[69] |

|information on candidates has national language subtitles?|The National Media and Infocommunications Authority (Nemzeti Média- és Hírközlési Hatóság) submitted that it was not in the position to provide|

| |any information in this regard due to the recent changes in the legislation and in the institutional system of media supervision.[70] |

| |However, according to the assessment of the National Media and Infocommunications Authority as mentioned above, the vast majority of the |

| |accessible programs (as identified by Article 39 of the Media Act)[71] on the six largest television channels are subtitled (in the first |

| |quarter of 2013 97.7% of the accessible programmes were subtitled, and the remaining 2.3% of the programmes were made accessible through sign |

| |language interpretation)[72] |

| |Finally, following the SINOSZ, for the most recent European Parliament and municipal elections in 2009 and 2010, no general information |

| |materials on voting were prepared in an accessible way for deaf and hearing impaired persons.[73] |

|What proportion of main public and/or private television |The Media Act requires accessibility only for deaf and hearing impaired persons, thus, there is no legal obligation to provide audio |

|broadcasts providing instructions for voting and |description to any television programmes. As stated by the National Media and Infocommunications Authority, currently there is no available, |

|information on candidates has audio description? |adequate technical solution which could be used widely and which would ensure full accessibility to television broadcasts for visually impaired|

| |persons.[74] |

|What proportion of main public and/or private television |As currently provided by the Media Act,[75] accessibility of announcements of public interest, political advertisements and political |

|broadcasts providing instructions for voting and |programmes for hearing impaired can be ensured either by subtitling or by providing sign language interpretation upon the decision of the media|

|information on candidates has sign language |service provider. |

|interpretation? |According to the assessment of the National Media and Infocommunications Authority, the vast majority of the accessible programs (as identified|

| |by Article 39 of the Media Act)[76] on the six largest television channels are subtitled (in the first quarter of 2013 97.7% of the accessible |

| |programmes were subtitled, and the remaining 2.3% of the programmes were made accessible through sign language interpretation)[77]Commercial |

| |media does not provide sign interpretation at all. |

| |The National Media and Infocommunications Authority monitored the programmes of the six largest TV channels (Duna TV, Duna World, M1, M2, RTL |

| |Klub, TV2). The monitoring period lasted for three months. During this period the experts of the Authority analysed altogether 1617 hours of |

| |programs. According to their report,[78] 56% of the programs were accessible for deaf and hearing impaired, compared to 45 % in 2012. |

| |Primarily news programs, the parliament broadcast, religious and sport programs and programmes targeting disabled persons has sign language |

| |interpretation, and this solely on the public television channels.[79] |

| |As to the latest European Parliament and municipal elections in 2009 and 2010 , following SINOSZ, that upon their request live election |

| |television programmes – “primarily regarding the national elections” – had sign language interpretations.[80] |

|How many political parties, out of the total who |Following the MVGYOSZ, none of the political parties made their political campaign materials accessible to blind and visually impaired persons |

|participated in the most recent European Parliament and |during the campaigns of the most recent European Parliament and municipal elections in 2009 and 2010.[81] |

|municipal elections, made their manifesto/campaign |Following the SINOSZ, only one party (the Fidesz – Hungarian Civic Alliance (Fidesz – Magyar Polgári Szövetség)) prepared campaign materials |

|material accessible to persons with disabilities (e.g. |accessible for deaf and hearing impaired persons as well as provided sign language interpretation – in case of on-line broadcasts – or live |

|large print, braille, easy-to-read, audio versions etc)? |subtitles -in case of campaign events- during the 2009 and 2010 European Parliament and municipal elections . The SINOSZ claims that other |

| |parties failed to comply with accessibility requirements even upon its request.[82] |

| |It is to be noted that under Article 147 (4) of the Election Procedure Act (adopted in 2013), in case of political advertisements to be |

| |published via audio-visual media services, customers (i.e. parties, etc.) are obliged to ensure that subtitles or sign language interpretation |

| |is provided. |

|What proportion of public authority national and municipal|No official data is available. According to the estimation of the MEOSZ, 65% of public authority national and municipal buildings are |

|buildings is accessible to persons with disabilities? |accessible.[83] |

| |In 2012, the Hungarian Government was heavily criticized because of the lack of information and monitoring mechanism by DPOs in this |

| |regard.[84] As the Government noted in its reply to the list of issues taken up during the consideration of the initial report of Hungary on |

| |the eights session of the Committee of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on 17-28 September 2012: “[...] we have no substantive |

| |information at the moment about exactly where and what type of accessibility is ensured to public services”.[85] |

|How many complaints related to infringements of the right |According to DPOs consulted no such complaints were filed. State institutions consulted did not report any complaints either[86]. Additionally,|

|to political participation of persons with disabilities |the National Election Office completed that it does not have information regarding the submissions received by local election bodies. |

|were recorded in 2012? What proportion of these complaints| |

|was successful? | |

-----------------------

[1] ; .

[2] ; .

[3] ; .

[4] Hungary, Fundamental Law of Hungary (Magyarország Alaptörvénye), available in Hungarian at: and in English at: parlament.hu/angol/the_fundamental_law_of_hungary_consolidated_interim.pdf.

[5] Hungary, Act XXXVI of 2013 on the Election Procedure (a választási eljárásról szóló 2013. évi XXXVI. törvény), available in Hungarian at: .

[6] Hungary, Act L of 2010 on the Election of Local Municipality Representatives and Mayors (a helyi önkormányzati képviselQ[pic]k és polgármesterek választásáról szóló 2010. évi L. törvény), available in Hungaria and Mayors (a helyi önkormányzati képviselők és polgármesterek választásáról szóló 2010. évi L. törvény), available in Hungarian at: .

[7] Hungary, Act CXIII of 2003 on the Election of Members of the European Parliament (az Európai Parlament tagjainak választásáról szóló 2003. évi CXIII. törvény), available in Hungarian at: .

[8] Hungary, Act CLXXIX of 2011 on the Rights of Nationalities (a nemzetiségek jogairól szóló 2011. évi CLXXIX. törvény), available in Hungarian at: .

[9] Hungary, Act CCXXXVIII of 2013 on the referendum initiative, the European citizens’ initiative and the referendum process (a népszavazás kezdeményezéséről, az európai polgári kezdeményezésről, valamint a népszavazási eljárásról szóló 2013. évi CCXXXVIII. törvény), available in Hungarian at: .

[10] Hungary, Election Procedure Act, Article 334; and Hungary, Act CXIII of 2003 on the Election of Members of the European Parliament (az Európai Parlament tagjainak választásáról szóló 2003. évi CXIII. törvény), Article 4 b), available in Hungarian at: .

[11]Hungary, Election Procedure Act, Articles 82 (2) c) and 84 (1); Hungary, Act CCIII of 2011 on the Election of Members of Parliament (az országgyűlési képviselők választásáról szóló 2011. évi CCIII. törvény), Article 2 (2), available in Hungarian at: .

[12] Hungary, Election Procedure Act, Articles 86–87.

[13] Hungary, Act CLXXIC of 2011 on the Rights of Nationalities (a nemzetiségek jogairól szóló 2011. évi CLXXIX. törvény), Article 53 (1), available in Hungarian at: ; Hungary, Election Procedure Act, Article 86.

[14] Hungary, Act CCIII of 2011 on the Election of Members of Parliament (az országgyűlési képviselők választásáról szóló 2011. évi CCIII. törvény), Article 12 (2), available in Hungarian at: .

[15] Hungary, The Fundamental Law of Hungary (Magyarország Alaptörvénye), 2011 April 25. Hungarian Official Gazette (Magyar Közlöny) No. 43/2011, available in Hungarian at: and in English at: parlament.hu/angol/the_fundamental_law_of_hungary_consolidated_interim.pdf

[16] Hungary, Hungarian Civil Liberties Union (2013) Vélemény a 2013. évi … törvény a választási eljárásról szóló 2013. évi XXXVI. törvény módosításáról szóló T/11200 törvényjavaslat 2. §-áról (24 May), available at:

[17] Hungary, Act IV of 1959 on the Civil Code (a Polgári Törvénykönyvről szóló 1959. évi IV. törvény), Article 21 (2), available in Hungarian at: .

[18] Hungary, Election Procedure Act, Article 104 (2).

[19] Hungary, Election Procedure Act, Article 103 (3).

[20] Hungary, Act CXXV of 2003 on Equal Treatment and the Promotion of Equal Opportunities (az egyenlő bánásmódról és az esélyegyenlőség előmozdításáról szóló 2003. évi CXXV. törvény), available in Hungarian at: .

[21] Hungary, Act XXVI of 1998 on Ensuring the Rights and Equal Chances of Persons with Disabilities (a fogyatékos személyek jogairól és esélyegyenlőségük biztosításáról szóló 1998. évi XXVI. törvény), available in Hungarian at: .

[22] Hungary, Act XCII of 2007 on the Promulgation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its Optional Protocol (a Fogyatékossággal élő személyek jogairól szóló egyezmény és az ahhoz kapcsolódó Fakultatív Jegyzőkönyv kihirdetéséről szóló 2007. évi XCII. törvény), available in Hungarian at: .

[23] Hungary, Act CLXXXV of 2010 on Media Services and Mass Media (a médiaszolgáltatásokról és a tömegkommunikációról szóló 2010. évi CLXXXV. törvény), Article 39, available in Hungarian at: .

[24] This refers to “media services provided by a media service provider that allow for the simultaneous watching or listening to programmes on the basis of a programme schedule” as stated in Act CIV of 2010 on the freedom of the press and the fundamental rules on media content (a sajtószabadságról és a médiatartalmak alapvető szabályairól szóló 2010. évi CIV. törvény), Article 1 (5) available in Hungarian at: .

[25] Following the National Media and Infocommunications Authority (Nemzeti Média és Hírközlési Hatóság) the notion “linear media service providers with significant market power” practically covers national television channels.

[26] Hungary, information provided by the National Media and Infocommunications Authority; Hungary, nmhh.hu (6 July 2013) Egyre több a feliratos műsor a televízióban, . For the latest analysis, covering the first quarter of 2013, see: Hungary, National Media and Infocommunications Authority (Nemzeti Média és Hírközlési Hatóság) (2013) Supervision of the accessibility requirements supporting the inclusion of persons living with hearing impairment, First quarter of 2013 (A hallási fogyatékkal élők befogadását segítő feliratozással kapcsolatos kívánalmak ellenőrzése, 2013. I. negyedév), available at: .

[27] Hungary, National Media and Infocommunications Authority (Nemzeti Média és Hírközlési Hatóság) (2013) Supervision of the accessibility requirements supporting the inclusion of persons living with hearing impairment, First quarter of 2013 (A hallási fogyatékkal élők befogadását segítő feliratozással kapcsolatos kívánalmak ellenőrzése, 2013. I. negyedév), available at: .

[28] Information provided by the National Election Office on the 2nd of September 2013.

[29] Resolution of Parliament 10/2006 (16 February) on the National Disability Programme (10/2006. (II. 16.) OGY határozat az új Országos Fogyatékosügyi Programról).

[30] Government Decree No. 1056/2012, 1056/2012. (III. 9.) Korm. Határozat az új Országos Fogyatékosügyi Program végrehajtásának 2012–2013. évekre vonatkozó intézkedési tervérôl.

[31] Hungary, Act CXXV of 2003 on Equal Treatment and the Promotion of Equal Opportunities (az egyenlő bánásmódról és az esélyegyenlőség előmozdításáról szóló 2003. évi CXXV. törvény), available in Hungarian at: .

[32] Hungary, Act IV of 1959 on the Civil Code (a Polgári Törvénykönyvről szóló 1959. évi IV. törvény), Articles 75-85, available in Hungarian at: .

[33] Hungary, Act XXXVI of 2013 on the Election Procedure (a választási eljárásról szóló 2013. évi XXXVI. törvény), Chapter XII, available in Hungarian at: .

[34] Hungary, Act CXXXI of 2010 on Social Participation in Preparing Laws (a jogszabályok előkészítésében való társadalmi részvételről szóló 2010. évi CXXXI. törvény), available in Hungarian at: .

[35] Hungary, Act CXXXI of 2010 on Social Participation in Preparing Laws (a jogszabályok előkészítésében való társadalmi részvételről szóló 2010. évi CXXXI. törvény), Article 13 (4) b), available in Hungarian at: .

[36] Hungary, “The Ministry of Public Administration and Justice concluded agreements for strategic cooperation with NGOs” (Civilekkel kötött stratégiai partnerségi megállapodást a Közigazgatási és Igazságügyi Minisztérium) (13 March 2012), available at: kormany.hu/hu/kozigazgatasi-es-igazsagugyi-miniszterium/parlamenti-allamtitkarsag/hirek/civilekkel-kotott-strategiai-partnersegi-megallapodast-a-kozigazgatasi-es-igazsagugyi-miniszterium.

[37] It is important to notice that even with a sometimes limited time to consult on the draft legal texts, the possibility of commenting and the possibility for the legislator to take note of those comments is present and it resulted on various occasions in the improvement of the draft provisions.

[38] For an English summary on the practice of consultation and tabling Bills, see: Committee on the Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by Member States of the Council of Europe (Monitoring Committee) (10 June 2013) Request for the opening of a monitoring procedure in respect of Hungary – Doc. 13229 Report, 2.1. Legislative activity and 3.3. The excessive use of cardinal laws and cardinal provision, available at: ; and:

[39] Information provided by the SINOSZ (19 July 2013).

[40] Information provided by the MVGYOSZ (15 July 2013).

[41] Information provided by the president of the MEOSZ and co-chair of the National Disability Council (8 July 2013). No online source available.

[42] No information about court cases dealing with the right to political participation of persons with disabilities could be given by DPOs.

[43] Written information provided by the Equal Treatment Authority in its letter dated 8 July 2013.

[44] As of 1 January 2012, by virtue of the Fundamental Law and related legislation, the former four Ombudspersons of Hungary (including the Parliamentary Commissioner for Civil Rights) were replaced by the sole Commissioner for Fundamental Rights (alapvető jogok biztosa).

[45] Hungary, Parliamentary Commissioner for Civil Rights (2009) Report of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Civil Rights concerning case nr. OBH 2405/2009. (Az állampolgári jogok országgyűlési biztosának jelentése az OBH 2405/2009. számú ügyben), available at: .hu/download.php?ctag=download&docID=21701.

[46] See .hu/download.php?ctag=download&docID=21701 (report) and (project)

[47] UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (2013) Disability rights: UN experts reject restrictions on persons with intellectual disabilities’ right to vote, Geneva(30 September 2013) available at: EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=13798&LangID=E

[48] Hungary, Act XX of 1949, Constitution of the Republic of Hungary (1949) (1949. évi XX. törvény, a Magayar Köztársaság Alkotmánya).

[49] Hungary, Fundamental Law of Hungary (Magyarország Alaptörvénye), Article XXIII, paragraph 6, available in Hungarian at: and in English at: parlament.hu/angol/the_fundamental_law_of_hungary_consolidated_interim.pdf.

[50] United Nations, CRPD/C/10/D/4/2011, Distr.: General 20 September 2013, Communication No. 4/2011, Views adopted by the Committee at its tenth session (2-13 September 2013); Submitted by:Zsolt Bujdosó and five others (represented by counsel, János Fiala, Disability Rights Center), Alleged victims: the authors, State party: Hungary; Date of communication:14 September 2011 (initial submission), Document references:Special Rapporteur’s rule 70 decision, transmitted to the State party on 1 November 2011 (not issued in document form); Date of adoption of Views: 9 September 2013., available in English: Documents/HRBodies/CRPD/Jurisprudence/CRPD-C-10-D-4-2011_en.doc

[51] Hungary, Fundamental Law of Hungary (Magyarország Alaptörvénye), available in Hungarian at: and in English at: parlament.hu/angol/the_fundamental_law_of_hungary_consolidated_interim.pdf

[52] Hungary, Transitional Provisions of the Fundamental Law of Hungary (Magyarország Alaptörvényének Átmeneti Rendelkezései), Article 26, paragraph 2.

[53] Information provided by the National Election Office.

[54] Information provided by the Equal Treatment Authority.

[55] Information provided by the National Election Office.

[56] Information available on the website of the National Election Office at: valasztas.hu/hu/onkval2010/469/469_0_index.html.

[57]Information available on the website of the National Election Office at: valasztas.hu/hu/ep2009/7/7_0_index.html and valasztas.hu/hu/ep2009/6/6_0_index.html.

[58] Information available on the website of the National Election Office at: valasztas.hu/hu/parval2010/352/352_0_index.html.

[59] Written information provided by the SINOSZ (19 July 2013); Hungary, .

[60] See

[61] Written information provided by the MEOSZ (8 July 2013); Hungary, nol.hu (4 May 2006) Minden képviselőt kerekes székbe ültet, nol.hu/archivum/archiv-402707?ref=sso.

[62] See “Az első kerekesszékes képviselő a Magyar Országgyűlésben”, available at: mozgasserultek.?id=17073&cim=1. Additionally, in June 2013, during the flood in Hungary, an article was published on the website of Fidesz party, reporting that Fidesz MP Ferenc Hirt participated personally in the flood defence works, “despite being a wheelchair user”. See Fidesz.hu (2013) “Hirt Ferenc kerekesszékes képviselő is részt vett az árvízi védekezésben”, June 10; available at: fidesz.hu/index.php?Cikk=192988

[63] See WebBulvar (2005) “Szili Katalin először beszélt fogyatékosságáról”, March 21, available at:

[64] See Közelkép (2008) “Fogyatékos Emberek Parlamenti Napja 2008”, August 3, available at:

[65] Information obtained from the MEOSZ (8 July 2013).

[66] Information obtained from the MVGYOSZ(9 July 2013).

[67] Information provided by the MVGYOSZ(9 July 2013). The assessment was prepared for the purpose of the present report, it was not published and is not available online.

[68] Information provided by the National Election Office (12 July 2013).

[69] Information provided by the National Election Office (12 July 2013).

[70] Information provided by the National Media and Infocommunications Authority (12 July 2013).

[71] Hungary, Act CLXXXV of 2010 on Media Services and Mass Media (a médiaszolgáltatásokról és a tömegkommunikációról szóló 2010. évi CLXXXV. törvény), Article 39, available in Hungarian at: .

[72] Hungary, National Media and Infocommunications Authority (Nemzeti Média és Hírközlési Hatóság) (2013) Supervision of the accessibility requirements supporting the inclusion of persons living with hearing impairment, First quarter of 2013 (A hallási fogyatékkal élők befogadását segítő feliratozással kapcsolatos kívánalmak ellenőrzése, 2013. I. negyedév), available at:

[73] Information provided by the SINOSZ (19 July 2013).

[74] Information provided by the National Media and Infocommunications Authority(12 July 2013).

[75] Hungary, Act 185 of 2010 on Media Services and Mass Media (a médiaszolgáltatásokról és a tömegkommunikációról szóló 2010. évi CLXXXV. törvény), Article 39.

[76] Hungary, Act CLXXXV of 2010 on Media Services and Mass Media (a médiaszolgáltatásokról és a tömegkommunikációról szóló 2010. évi CLXXXV. törvény), Article 39, available in Hungarian at: .

[77] Hungary, National Media and Infocommunications Authority (Nemzeti Média és Hírközlési Hatóság) (2013) Supervision of the accessibility requirements supporting the inclusion of persons living with hearing impairment, First quarter of 2013 (A hallási fogyatékkal élők befogadását segítő feliratozással kapcsolatos kívánalmak ellenőrzése, 2013. I. negyedév), available at:

[78] Hungary, National Media and Infocommunications Authority (Nemzeti Média és Hírközlési Hatóság) (2013) Supervision of the accessibility requirements supporting the inclusion of persons living with hearing impairment, First quarter of 2013 (A hallási fogyatékkal élők befogadását segítő feliratozással kapcsolatos kívánalmak ellenőrzése, 2013. I. negyedév), available at:

[79] Hungary, National Media and Infocommunications Authority (Nemzeti Média és Hírközlési Hatóság) (2013) Supervision of the accessibility requirements supporting the inclusion of persons living with hearing impairment, First quarter of 2013 (A hallási fogyatékkal élők befogadását segítő feliratozással kapcsolatos kívánalmak ellenőrzése, 2013. I. negyedév), p. 5, available at: . According to this study, only 2.3% of the accessible programmes were provided with sign language interpretation.

[80]Information provided by the SINOSZ(19 July 2013).

[81] Information provided by the MVGYOSZ (15 July 2013).

[82] Information provided by the SINOSZ (19 July 2013).

[83] Hungary, HVG.hu (14 May 2013) Deadlines for complying with accessibility requirements are not set out by an Act of Parliament (Nem törvényben rögzítik az akadálymentesítési határidőket), vg.hu/vallalatok/egeszsegugy/nem-torvenyben-rogzitik-az-akadalymentesitesi-hataridoket-403588. There is no official data available, this is an estimation only.

[84] Hungary, Hungarian Disability Caucus, Additional information about Hungary’s compliance with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, with respect to the List of Issues and Replies from the Government of Hungary to the List of issues, 5 September 2012, p. 6., available at:

EN/HRBodies/CRPD/Pages/Session8.aspx.

[85]Replies submitted by the Government of Hungary to the list of issues (CRPD/C/HUN/Q/1) to be taken up during the consideration of the initial report of Hungary (CRPD/C/HUN/1), 6 July 2012, p. 5., available at;:EN/HRBodies/CRPD/Pages/Session8.aspx.

[86] Consulted were the Equal Treatment Authority, the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights (alapvető jogok biztosa) (as the successor of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Civil Rights) and the National Election Office.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download