After our question, ruling party Tisza changes wording of proposed amendment

In June, the government proposed an amendment to the law regulating the Integrity Authority, which would have effectively legalized collective punishment, sanctioning the IH’s vice presidents in case its president was removed by the State Audit Office. After we brought the issue to PM Péter Magyar’s attention on a press conference, the problematic wording was promptly removed from the bill.

Created during Viktor Orbán’s final ter as Prime Minister to remedy the systematic corruption that has led to the freezing of EU funds for Hungary, the Integrity Authority (IH) was soon embroiled in a corruption scandal of its own. In early 2025, the Central Investigative Prosecutor’s Office questioned the IH’s president Ferenc Biró on suspicion of misappropriation of IH funds, and abuse of office.

Although the investigation was a massive public spectacle at the time, the case seemingly did not advance until after the 2026 election. In early June,

the Central Investigative Prosecutor’s Office charged Ferenc Biró with embezzlement and other criminal offenses.

Biró’s wife allegedly used the car rented by the Integrity Authority without authorization. He also allegedly prevented the IH’s two vice presidents from exercising their authority to advance his own agenda, illegally established a diplomatic mission in Brussels, and hired a family friend despite him lacking the necessary qualifications. In total, according to the prosecution, Biró caused financial damages exceeding 140 million HUFs (394,000 EUR) to the Integrity Authority.

Despite the allegations, Biró remains the head of the IH, and can only be removed by a proposal issued by László Windisch, the president of the State Audit Office, which then needs to be ratified by a court. Windisch also waited until after the election, eventually filing a lawsuit to remove the president of the Integrity Authority.

Shortly after this, the new government led by Péter Magyar introduced a bill to amend the law regulating the Integrity Authority. The proposal included this amendment:

“(…) (7) If the court finds that the claim of the president of the State Audit Office under paragraph (4) is well-founded, the court
a) in its resolution, jointly terminates the legal relationship of the president and Deputy presidents of the Authority, provided that the action is well-founded because the president or Deputy president of the Authority does not meet the appointment conditions of Section 36, taking into account Section 24, paragraph (1) a), paragraphs (2)-(4) of the Act,
b) in cases not falling under point a), the president or Deputy president of the Authorityshall terminate their legal relationship.”

It does not take a legal scholar to see the issue with the phrasing:

the amendment would have automatically punished the IH’s vice presidents for the president’s conduct,

regardless of whether they have committed any crime.

Since collective punishment is prohibited in the Hungarian legal system too, we asked the government and Prime Minister Péter Magyar, first in writing, and then at a live press conference whether we understood correctly: if the president is removed, then the two vice presidents need to go too, even if there are no criminal proceedings against them? The idea is especially problematic in the present case, since Biró is charged with curtailing the vice presidents’ powers.

Eszter Katus’s question and Péter Magyar’s answer

Prime Minister Péter Magyar then replied that the wording indeed states that the president and vice presidents should leave together. He added that this may be necessary for the IH to gain the public’s trust and explained that the new government plans to expand the IH’s powers. However, Magyar also stated that the bill is still under review, and the final text may be changed.

Problematic part deleted

A week later, Transportation Minister Dávid Vitézy said at a June press conference that the bill would be modified on several points.

To find out exactly what had changed, we contacted the National Assembly’s Press Office, where we learned that point 127 of the new amendment deletes Section 143 of the text of the originally submitted bill (i.e., the amendment to the rules governing lawsuits that may be initiated by the President of the State Audit Office).

In other words, the section which included the collective punishment of vice presidents has been completely removed from the text.

The full text of the bill still contains significant adjustments to the IH’s operation, including the expansion of its powers. For example, in the future, the Authority it will be able to review asset declarations (and take action if necessary), access the asset declarations of politicians’ family members, and exercise broader powers in the area of public procurement. Furthermore, if the IH detects a violation of public procurement law, it may request that the Public Procurement Arbitration Committee initiate proceedings, and it may also request the suspension of the procurement procedure.

The bill would also create two new VP positions, bringing the total number to 4. It designates the Board of Directors (comprised of the president and the four vice presidents) as the Authority’s highest decision-making body, which can make decisions by a majority vote.