Hungarian rights groups condemn proposed 12-year parliamentary term limit

Hungarian human rights organizations have voiced strong criticism against a proposed constitutional amendment that would limit parliamentary terms to 12 years, arguing it violates international rights standards and lacks proportionality.

The Hungarian Civil Liberties Union (TASZ) stated that restricting eligibility for parliamentary seats directly impacts passive voting rights and limits citizens' freedom to choose their representatives. While acknowledging that parliamentary renewal can be a legitimate goal, TASZ argues the government has not sufficiently justified the 12-year limit as a necessary or proportionate measure, nor has it explored less restrictive alternatives.

The Hungarian Helsinki Committee also criticized the expedited legislative process, noting the insufficient five-day public consultation period. They argue that the draft includes elements, such as abolishing independent regulatory bodies and capping parliamentary terms, that are not essential for restoring the rule of law. The committee suggests these issues should be addressed in a more comprehensive constitutional reform process. Furthermore, they contend the term limit could disproportionately affect opposition parties compared to the ruling government.

While the Helsinki Committee supported certain aspects of the proposal, like reinstating the 70-year retirement age for Constitutional Court judges and terminating President Tamás Sulyok's mandate, they stressed the need for detailed justification and rule-of-law guarantees. Constitutional lawyer Csaba Tordai echoed these concerns, suggesting the European Court of Human Rights would likely not uphold the parliamentary term limit, drawing a contrast with potential limits on prime ministerial terms.

“

the parliamentary term limit would likely not withstand scrutiny by the European Court of Human Rights.