Human Rights Watch World Report 1994 - Hungary
- Document source:
-
Date:
1 January 1994
Events of 1993
Human Rights Developments
In recent years, Hungary has made significant progress toward implementing both legal and institutional protections for human rights. The amended constitution confers a broad array of rights and protections on all Hungarian citizens. On July 7, 1993, after two years of debate, the Hungarian parliament approved a Law on the Rights of National and Ethnic Minorities, which guarantees the use of names and education in the mother language. In June, the parliament also created an ombudsman's office to investigate allegations of constitutional violations of individual rights.
Despite these achievements, Hungary experienced a dramatic rise in xenophobia and right-wing violence. Although the Roma (Gypsy) minority, which is estimated at approximately 450,000,has organized politically, and Roma politicians entered the parliament, discrimination and racism remain prevalent. Romas were often the targets of discriminatory practices and faced severe discrimination in employment, housing, education and access to health care. Romas had little opportunity to obtain redress for their grievances. It remained unclear whether the newly established ombudsman's office would provide support to the Roma minority in seeking justice.
In the past two years, violence against Romas increased dramatically. In July, a young Roma man suffered brain damage after he was severely beaten by skinheads. This marked the twenty-fifth reported assault on the Roma community in Budapest since 1991. Moreover, experts believe that a very small percentage of attacks on Romas are ever reported. Helsinki Watch also received many reports that the police failed to intervene or to arrest those who attacked Romas.
Foreigners living in Hungary also became targets of skinhead violence. The Martin Luther King Association, a Hungarian organization documenting racist attacks, reported that in 1992 there were seventy-seven racist attacks on foreigners by nationalist youth groups. All involved foreign students from Africa, Asia and the Middle East. This trend continued in 1993. Helsinki Watch received reports that the police refused to disperse the attackers, were rude to those foreigners who complained, and were slow to investigate and resolve these cases. Police abuse against dark-skinned foreigners also appeared prevalent. In separate incidents in December 1992 and January 1993, the Fifth District Police Station in Budapest allegedly detained and beat about twelve people of Middle Eastern origin. Moreover, officials at the Kerepestarcs detention camp for illegal aliens were severely criticized by human rights groups because former detainees complained that guards used torture or very abusive treatment. The camp authorities and the government denied allegations of ill-treatment and torture.
Controversy surrounded the Hungarian media during 1993, as the government engaged in a dispute over the control of radio and television. Political parties and human rights organizations accused the government of monopolizing and manipulating the media. In December 1992, parliament had approved a bill that placed the budget of the radio and television under the prime minister's office. In the spring of 1993, the Constitutional Court upheld a moratorium on the privatization of radio and television until a media law could be passed. As of mid-November, no media law had been voted on by the parliament.
The Right to Monitor
Helsinki Watch was not aware of any attempt by the government to impede human rights observers in their investigations and reporting during 1993.
U.S. Policy
U.S. policy toward Hungary was responsive to human rights issues during 1993. The U.S. Embassy in Budapest used various opportunities to express concern about the growth of right-wing extremism and anti-Semitism. For example, in an interview with the Hungarian daily Magyar Hirlap on July 3, Amb. Charles Thomas stated:
There have been manifestations of anti-western, anti-democracy irredentism, pro-ethnic cleansing, and anti-Semitic concepts that appeared in writings last summer. Should these ideas prevail – and I am confident that they will not – it would be a disaster for U.S.-Hungarian relations. The U.S. could never be friends with a regime that attempted to summon up these demons from the past.
Similarly, when asked whether concern about extremist movements is "overemphasized in the western press" in an interview with The Hungarian Observer, Ambassador Thomas stated:
"I think concern about the emergence of right-wing radicalism in Hungary is something thatpeople should be very sensitive to and that's why I don't think reactions are exaggerated in the west and they should be deeply concerned about this." On October 21, Secretary of State Warren Christopher visited Budapest, reiterating U.S. support for democratization and economic reform in Hungary. It was Christopher's first visit to an East European country since becoming Secretary of State.
The Work of Helsinki Watch
Helsinki Watch's work in Hungary centered on two principal issues: the rights treatment of the Roma minority and freedom of the press. In January, Helsinki Watch sent a mission to Hungary to investigate the treatment of Romas. A report issued in July 1993 concluded that Romas were increasingly singled out as targets for violence by skinheads and other militant nationalists, and that public authorities had not responded adequately, either in apprehending or prosecuting the offenders. Moreover, Helsinki Watch concluded that excessive force and unlawful detention at the hands of the police appeared to be more prevalent against Romas than against ethnic Hungarians, as the authorities apparently acted out the widely-held racist stereotype of Romas as dishonest and violent.
In September, Helsinki Watch sent a fact-finding mission to investigate allegations of Hungarian government interference with the print and broadcast media. A report on the mission's findings was planned for release in late November.
Disclaimer: © Copyright, Human Rights Watch
This is not a UNHCR publication. UNHCR is not responsible for, nor does it necessarily endorse, its content. Any views expressed are solely those of the author or publisher and do not necessarily reflect those of UNHCR, the United Nations or its Member States.