Published on 25 August 2025
SECOND SECTION
Application no. 49768/19
Ildikó BANGÓNÉ BORBÉLY and Others
against Hungary
lodged on 5 September 2019
communicated on 8 August 2025
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns the imposition of a fine on opposition members of Parliament by the Speaker of Parliament. On 12 December 2018 a voting procedure regarding a bill amending the Labour Code and other related acts to increase the permissible hours of overtime in the private sector took place in Parliament. The applicants expressed their disagreement with the bill by physically blocking the Speaker’s access to the pulpit and by resorting to other means (listed in the appended Table). Subsequently, the Speaker imposed fines on them in amounts equalling to one month’s salary. The applicants challenged the Speaker’s decisions before the Immunity Committee. Since the Committee did not take a decision within the prescribed time-period, the decisions were submitted to a vote of the plenary Parliament, which upheld the decisions by a majority during its session on 19 March 2019.
The applicants rely on Article 10 of the Convention and complain that the impugned measure was unnecessary and disproportionate, and that the procedural safeguards available to challenge the Speaker’s decisions were not appropriate or sufficient.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Has there been an interference with the applicants’ freedom of expression, within the meaning of Article 10 § 1 of the Convention, by the imposition of a fine on the applicants, in particular having regard to their role as elected Members of Parliament participating in debates of public interest and scrutinising decisions of the Government?
2. If so, was that interference prescribed by law and necessary in terms of Article 10 § 2 (see Karácsony and Others v. Hungary [GC], nos. 42461/13 and 44357/13, §§ 137-47, 17 May 2016)? In particular, were the reasons adduced by the national authorities to justify the amounts of the fines relevant and sufficient (ibid., § 148) and was the measure accompanied by effective and adequate procedural safeguards (ibid., §§ 151 and 156-57)?
APPENDIX
List of applicants:
Application no.
Case name
Introduction date
Applicant’s name
Year of birth
Place of residence
Nationality
Representative’s name
Location
Specific conduct (if any) and amount of the fine
49768/19
Bangóné Borbély and Others v. Hungary
05/09/2019
Ildikó BANGÓNÉ BORBÉLY
1972
Kaba
Hungarian
Zita GURMAI
1965
Budapest
Hungarian
Tamás Attila HARANGOZÓ
1979
Szekszárd
Hungarian
Dezső HISZÉKENY
1956
Budapest
Hungarian
Lajos KORÓZS
1958
Eger
Hungarian
Ágnes KUNHALMI
1982
Budapest
Hungarian
Gyula MOLNÁR
1961
Budapest
Hungarian
Zsolt Krisztián MOLNÁR
1974
Budapest
Hungarian
Sándor SZABÓ
1975
Szeged
Hungarian
József TÓBIÁS
1970
Törökbálint
Hungarian
Bertalan TÓTH
1975
Pécs
Hungarian
László VARGA
1979
Miskolc
Hungarian
Evelyn FRANK
Budapest
Having used a whistle; amount of 1,514,700 Hungarian forints (HUF)
Having used a whistle; amount of
HUF 1,069,200
Amount of
HUF 1,514,700
Conduct displayed as a parliamentary official; amount of
HUF 1,514,700
Amount of
HUF 1,514,700
Having used a whistle and displayed placards; amount of
HUF 1,336,500
Amount of
HUF 1,336,500
Amount of
HUF 1,336,500
Having used a whistle; amount of
HUF 1,514,700
Amount of
HUF 891,000
Having used a whistle; amount of
HUF 1,782,000
Conduct displayed as a parliamentary official; amount of
HUF 1,514,700