The Sovereignty Protection Office failed to appear in court to prove its accusations

The Sovereignty Protection Office did not appear at the first hearing of the lawsuit that our newspaper filed against them. According to the editor-in-chief of Átlátszó, the Office is stalling because they have no evidence for the serious accusations that they made public in their report published last October and have been promoting in the propaganda media ever since. Instead, they claim that they only expressed opinions and conclusions. However, these opinions can now destroy independent editorial offices and civil society organizations under the so-called transparency bill.

“To our greatest regret, the court postponed the hearing of the lawsuit filed by Átlátszó, as the lawyer representing the Office participated in another hearing on the scheduled date. We are very much looking forward to the hearing on June 24,” the Sovereignty Protection Office (SPO) wrote on its Facebook page after they failed to appear on the first day of the hearing of the lawsuit that our newspaper filed against them.

Átlátszó filed a personal rights lawsuit against the Sovereignty Protection Office after the latter, in its “investigation report” last year, accused Átlátszó of, among other things, being a member of a foreign pressure and influence network, falsifying news, spreading disinformation or engaging in intelligence activities. Since these allegations are untrue, we have taken the matter to court: we asked the court to prohibit the SPO from further violations, and to oblige them to issue an apology and pay damages. Our full court action can be read here in Hungarian.

The Sovereignty Protection Office filed a counterclaim, requesting the termination of the lawsuit or the dismissal of the claim: they even dispute that the Metropolitan Court has jurisdiction in the case. Furthermore, they make statements that everything written about us in the report is just an opinion, a conclusion, and not an accusation of crimes against a news organisation by a state agency.

In light of this, it is perhaps not surprising that on May 20, the first day of the trial, the legal representative of the Sovereignty Protection Office did not appear in the court, citing a timing issue. The trial will therefore continue on June 24.

This procedure is no longer just about Átlátszó’s reputation

Tamás Bodoky, editor-in-chief of Átlátszó, said after the adjourned hearing that “if the Sovereignty Protection Office had any evidence for the serious accusations against Átlátszó, a substantive hearing could have been held. The fact that they are now stalling for time with such procedural tricks shows that there is no such evidence.” Instead, there is a cover-up with freedom of speech when a state organization refers to its own report as an opinion.

According to Bodoky, so far this procedure has only been about Átlátszó’s sense of justice, that we did not let the accusations of the Sovereignty Protection Office stand, because the condemnation had not previously been accompanied by sanctions. But with the so-called “transparency” bill submitted last week by the governing party, the Sovereignty Protection Office may be given powers with which it can blacklist organizations – precisely based on reports such as those written about Átlátszó.

“The stakes have become huge, and it is not only about Átlátszó any more, but about all independent media and civil society organizations in Hungary,” the editor-in-chief emphasized.

Written by Eszter Katus, the Hungarian version of this story is here. Cover image: Dénes Balogh