The Hungarian legislative proposals targeting NGOs that assist irregular migrants must be canceled, said the Venice Commission of the Council of Europe in an opinion returned at the plenary session of Friday 22 June.
The constitutional law experts of the Council of Europe, assisted by legal experts from the OSCE, focus their attentions on article 353A of the legislative package known as 'Stop Soros', which was adopted last week in Budapest (see EUROPE 12001).
This provision introduces the criminal offence of facilitating irregular migration. It may not run counter to international human rights standards, the Venice Commission considers, reiterating that many European countries criminalise assisting irregular migrants from entering, residing or transiting in return for financial gains – which may be considered a legitimate aim of preventing crime. In this case, however, the new Hungarian law goes far further, as it criminalises the preparation and distribution of information documents or the submission of asylum applications.
On top of that, and contrary to comparable legislation elsewhere in Europe, the package makes no provision for exemptions for humanitarian assistance purposes.
In its opinion, the Venice Commission also calls into question the related punishments, which it describes as “disproportionate”, as they may entail up to one year's imprisonment or cause an NGO to be dissolved if even one of its members is found guilty.
The opinion also refers to the lack of “significant public consultation”. Promised in February, when the legislative bill was presented, this consultation has not taken place, the experts of the Council of Europe lament, also regretting the fact that the 'Stop Soros' package was voted through two days before the adoption of their opinion, which was requested by the committee on legal matters and human rights of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.
Gianni Buquicchio, chair of the Venice Commission, met the Hungarian Foreign Minister, Peter Szijjártó, on Monday 18 June, and asked for the vote to be held after this opinion had been adopted – in vain, as the vote was held on Wednesday 20 June. (Original version in French by Véronique Leblanc)