Hungary’s ruling Fidesz party has tabled a new draft law in parliament that would allow authorities to blacklist organisations receiving foreign funding if they are deemed to pose a threat to national sovereignty.
The proposed measure, backed by Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s government, has drawn widespread criticism from opposition figures and civil society groups, who say it closely mirrors legislation adopted in Russia targeting foreign agents.
The bill, submitted this week, would expand the powers of the Sovereignty Protection Office (SPO), an agency set up by the Orban government to monitor perceived external influence on Hungarian public life. Under the proposed framework, the SPO would be authorised to investigate, restrict, or even ban legal entities—such as NGOs and other associations—if their activities are considered to “undermine Hungary’s independent, democratic and rule-of-law-based character” or contravene what the government defines as Hungary’s “constitutional identity” and “Christian culture”.
Entities that challenge established norms relating to marriage, family, or gender may fall within the scope of the proposed restrictions. A constitutional amendment passed last month, banning the public display of homosexuality and gender diversity, may serve as a basis for interpreting such threats. The amendment also granted Hungarian police expanded surveillance powers, including the use of facial recognition technology.
Although no timeline has been confirmed, the Fidesz-dominated parliament is expected to vote on the draft in the coming days. The legislation comes in the context of heightened political activity ahead of general elections scheduled for 2026. With Fidesz holding a significant parliamentary majority, passage of the bill appears likely.
The Budapest Mayor, Gergely Karácsony, a prominent critic of the government, condemned the legislation, stating on social media that it “follows the Russian pattern: it is about abuse of power, revenge and pettiness”. Rights organisations, including the Hungarian Helsinki Committee, have also voiced concerns, characterising the bill as “a significant escalation in the government’s efforts to suppress dissent, weaken human rights protection and consolidate its grip on power”.
This latest move is consistent with a broader pattern of legal and institutional reforms under Orban’s leadership, many of which have drawn criticism from the European Union and international watchdogs. Over the past several years, the Hungarian government has implemented more than a dozen legislative changes affecting freedom of expression, education, and judicial independence. These have included restrictions on university autonomy, media consolidation, and regulations impacting foreign-funded civil society organisations.
Orban has also intensified his campaign on what the government describes as “traditional values”. The Fidesz narrative links foreign influence to cultural liberalism and perceived threats to national identity. In March, the Prime Minister pledged to take action against politicians and journalists receiving foreign financial support, reinforcing his administration’s emphasis on sovereignty and national cohesion.
Observers note that this legislative push may also be intended to counter rising political competition. The newly formed Tisza party, led by Peter Magyar—a former Fidesz insider—has gained significant traction in recent months. Magyar, who broke with Orban and has adopted an anti-corruption platform, has drawn support from disaffected voters, particularly amid ongoing economic difficulties. Inflation, stagnant wages, and declining investment have contributed to voter frustration with the government.
Polls suggest that Tisza is closing the gap with Fidesz, especially in urban areas, and the ruling party appears intent on limiting external financial or organisational support for its challengers. Critics argue that the draft law could be used to discredit or dismantle independent organisations seen as sympathetic to opposition figures or foreign institutions.
Internationally, parallels have been drawn between the proposed Hungarian legislation and Russia’s Foreign Agents Law, which has been widely used by the Kremlin to constrain NGOs, journalists, and other perceived critics of the state. While the Hungarian government denies any such comparison, critics point to the increasing role of security institutions in regulating civil society.
The SPO, established last year, has already begun conducting investigations into media organisations and academic institutions. Its mandate and operational independence remain unclear, and the proposed bill would further concentrate discretionary power in the hands of this office.
Despite repeated calls from domestic and international actors for greater transparency and adherence to democratic norms, the Hungarian government maintains that its measures are necessary to defend national sovereignty and cultural integrity. With elections less than a year away, and Fidesz facing one of its most serious political challenges in over a decade, observers expect further moves aimed at tightening political control.
The European Commission has yet to comment on the proposed law, but past actions—including proceedings under Article 7 of the EU Treaty and the suspension of some funding—suggest that further scrutiny may follow.
Read also:
International Condemnation of Georgian Parliament’s Foreign Agents Law
