The proposed nomination of Judit Polgár shifts Hungary’s constitutional confrontation from the removal of an Orbán-era president to the choice of a successor presented as being above party politics.
Hungary’s dispute over its post-Orbán institutions has entered a new phase, with Prime Minister Péter Magyar proposing chess grandmaster Judit Polgár as the country’s next president after the termination of Tamás Sulyok’s mandate.
Magyar said on Sunday, 19 July, that he would meet Polgár and ask whether she was prepared to accept the nomination. He described her as a figure associated with talent and perseverance and said Hungary needed “unity, peace and a president whom every Hungarian can be proud of”. The proposed appointment was announced a day after Sulyok signed the constitutional amendment ending his own term. Parliament will elect the next head of state, with Magyar’s Tisza party holding the two-thirds majority required to determine the result.
Polgár had not publicly accepted the proposed nomination at the time of publication. Magyar said she would serve until Hungary adopts its planned new constitution, or for a maximum of five years. Her possible appointment would therefore form part of an interim constitutional arrangement rather than necessarily beginning a conventional full presidential term.
The 49-year-old has no background in elected politics or government. Her public standing rests on a chess career in which she became the only woman to reach the world’s top 10 in the open rankings. She became a grandmaster at 15, surpassing Bobby Fischer’s record at the time, and defeated a number of world champions before retiring from competitive chess in 2014. She has since concentrated on chess education and the work of her foundation.
Choosing Polgár would allow Magyar to argue that the presidency is being offered to a nationally recognised figure rather than a senior Tisza politician. Her international reputation and absence from the confrontation between Tisza and Fidesz may help the government present her as a candidate for national unity. However, her lack of constitutional or political experience is likely to be scrutinised during a period in which the presidency may be required to assess extensive institutional changes.
The proposal follows Sulyok’s decision to sign the seventeenth amendment to Hungary’s Fundamental Law. Sulyok condemned the measure as unprecedented and damaging to the rule of law but said he was required to sign because the amendment complied with the formal requirements of the existing constitution. Refusing to perform that duty, he argued, would itself have been unlawful.
His mandate is due to end at midnight on Monday, 20 July. Parliament Speaker Ágnes Forsthoffer will then exercise presidential powers temporarily, while parliament will have 30 days to elect a successor. The amendment provides that the new president will remain in office until a replacement constitution takes effect, subject to a maximum term of five years. The transfer of authority follows weeks of pressure from Magyar’s government for Sulyok to resign voluntarily.
Parliament approved the amendment on 13 July by 139 votes to six. Fidesz lawmakers boycotted the vote. The legislation cited a “serious loss of confidence” in Sulyok, who was elected president in 2024 by the former Fidesz-controlled parliament.
Magyar accused Sulyok of failing to act as an independent constitutional guardian during Viktor Orbán’s final years in office. Sulyok rejected that characterisation and had previously asked the Venice Commission to examine the constitutional dispute, arguing that removing a president for political reasons would weaken the separation of powers and the authority of the office.
The method used to end his mandate remains contentious. Presidents normally leave office through resignation, impeachment, incapacity or the expiry of their term. In this case, a governing supermajority inserted the early termination of a sitting president’s mandate into the constitution itself.
Magyar’s supporters argue that exceptional action was needed because officials appointed under Orbán retained the power to obstruct reforms supported by voters. Fidesz and other critics contend that changing the constitution to remove a particular officeholder creates a mechanism that future governments could use against presidents who resist them.
The amendment extends beyond the presidency. It introduces a 12-year or three-term limit for members of parliament, changes the appointment and retirement rules governing Constitutional Court judges and establishes the basis for a National Asset Recovery and Asset Protection Office. The new retirement age of 70 will require several senior constitutional judges to leave office, including court president Péter Polt, an Orbán ally.
These provisions form part of Magyar’s wider programme to dismantle the institutional system built during Orbán’s 16 years in power. Since taking office, the government has also acted against the Sovereignty Protection Office, restructured public broadcasting and promised a new constitution prepared through consultation and approved by referendum.
The EU dimension remains sensitive. European institutions spent years challenging Orbán’s governments over judicial independence, corruption, media pluralism and the concentration of state power. Magyar’s effort to reverse those policies may receive support in Brussels, but personalised constitutional provisions and accelerated institutional changes may also prompt questions about legal certainty, due process and the independence of officeholders.
Polgár’s possible appointment does not resolve those questions. It changes the political presentation of the transition by replacing an Orbán-era appointee with a prominent figure who has not previously belonged to the governing establishment.
The immediate issue is whether Polgár accepts the proposal. The longer-term test will be whether the next president can exercise independent judgement while Magyar’s parliamentary majority rewrites the constitutional order. Hungary’s dispute has moved beyond Sulyok’s signature; it now concerns the character of the presidency that will replace him and the limits placed on the government carrying out the transition.
