Hungary: Jobbik Party [The Movement for a Better Hungary, Jobbik Magyarorszagert Mozgalom] and the Hungarian Guard [Magyar Garda], including activities and impact on the government; relationship with the Roma community, including instances of violence and discrimination; state response (2013-June 2015)

1. Overview: Jobbik Party

According to sources, Jobbik Magyarorszagert Mozgalom (Jobbik Party) is the second most popular political party in Hungary (RFE/RL 31 Oct. 2014; Pulitzer Center 15 Sept. 2014; EurActiv and Reuters 1 Apr. 2015). It was reportedly founded in 2003 (PHW 2014, 612; Council of Europe 16 Dec. 2014, para. 77). The Jobbik Party manifesto, as posted on their website, describes the party as "a value-centered, conservative, patriotic Christian party with radical methodology" (Jobbik 24 Oct. 2003). In a 2013 interview with John Feffer, Director of think tank Foreign Policy in Focus (FPIF) (John Feffer n.d.), a project of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) [1], Tamas Hegedu, a Jobbik parliamentary representative who considers himself a "moderate," states that Jobbik members "agree with radicalism but not with extremism" (ibid. 30 Apr. 2014). In the same source, the Jobbik party is described as a "radical party that stands to the right of the Fidesz government" (ibid.). The US Department of State's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2014 describes Jobbik as an "extreme ethnic nationalist" party (US 25 June 2015, 51). Political Handbook of the World 2014 similarly describes Jobbik as "an extreme right-wing party with nationalist roots" and states that it "advocates for withdrawal from the EU, greater rights for ethnic Hungarians living in other countries . . . and a crackdown on 'Gypsy crime' (PHW 2014, 612). The president of the European Jewish Congress has referred to Jobbik as a "neo-Nazi" party (qtd. in AFP 7 Apr. 2014).

1.1 Impact on the Government

1.1.1 April 2014 Parliamentary Elections

The Fidesz party [Fidesz-KDNP (Christian Democratic People's Party)] is described by Country Reports 2014, as "center-right" (US 23 June 2015, 1). The same source notes that the party leader, Viktor Orban, has been prime minister since 2010 (ibid.).

According to Heinrich Böll Stiftung, a policy think tank associated with the German Green Party (Heinrich Böll Stiftung n.d.), between 2010 and 2014, the Fidesz governing party maintained its parliamentary majority, winning all parliamentary by-elections in this time and securing its majority in the country's April 2014 parliamentary elections (Heinrich Böll Stiftung 2 June 2015). According to Heinrich Böll Stiftung, the Fidesz party then lost three "critical" by-elections, one of which, in February 2015, was particularly significant as it "stripped Fidesz of its parliamentary supermajority" (2 June 2015). Other sources corroborate that the Fidesz party lost its two-thirds parliamentary majority in February 2015 (EUobserver 13 Apr. 2015; The New York Times 17 Mar. 2015; The Economist 18 Apr. 2015). According to an article in the New York Times by Kim Lane Scheppele, head of the Law and Public Affairs program at Princeton University, obtaining a two-thirds majority is required to govern the country on a daily basis (The New York Times, 17 Mar. 2015).

During the April 2014 parliamentary elections, Jobbik received approximately 21 percent of the vote (Reuters 9 Apr. 2014; Pulitzer Center 15 Sept. 2014; US 25 June 2015, 51). Sources further state that Jobbik's popularity has increased especially among young voters (The Jewish Chronicle 8 Apr. 2015; EUobserver 13 Apr. [2015]; AFP 7 Apr. 2014). According to Human Rights First, a US-based non-profit and non-partisan international human rights advocacy group (Human Rights First n.d.), during the 2014 elections Jobbik "did particularly well" in the northeast of the country, which has the highest rate of unemployment and lowest per-capita GDP (Aug. 2014, 43). Political Capital, a policy research and consulting institute that provides analysis on Central Europe (Political Capital n.d.), states that support for Jobbik is weakest in Budapest (ibid. 13 Oct. 2014, 4).

According to sources, Jobbik candidate Lajos Rig won an April 2015 by-election against the incumbent Fidesz MP (The Economist 18 Apr. 2015; AP 13 Apr. 2015). Sources note that the by-election was held in Tapolca (The Economist 18 Apr. 2015; Political Capital 13 Apr. 2015). Sources further indicate that this was the first direct win for Jobbik (The Economist 18 Apr. 2015; Reuters 14 Apr. 2015) rather than through the party list system (ibid.).

Sources note that March 2015 polls put Fidesz at between 21 and 24 percent support and Jobbik at between 15 and 18 percent (EUobserver 13 Apr. 2015; The Economist 18 Apr. 2015).

1.1.2 Policy Impact

According to the 2014 Transformation Index (BTI) [2] report by Bertelsmann Stiftung, a German private operating foundation which promotes research and understanding in areas such as religion, public health, international cultural exchange, democracy, government and civic engagement (Bertelsmann Stiftung n.d.), the Fidesz party "has tolerated, accommodated and sometimes even cooperated with Jobbik" (ibid. 2014, 13). Lane Sheppele notes that Jobbik has been the "only parliamentary party whose MPs have voted with Fidesz on a non-trivial number of occasions" (The New York Times 17 Mar. 2015). According to Feffer, "Jobbik often votes together with Fidesz on government policies, but not always" (Feffer 30 Apr. 2014).

According to sources, Fidesz has adopted parts of the Jobbik party's policy agenda (Pulitzer Center 15 Sept. 2014; Political Capital 15 May 2015; Heinrich Böll Stiftung 2 June 2015). A report by Political Capital states that this was done in an attempt to attract Jobbik voters and curb the growing popularity of the party (15 May 2015).

Heinrich Böll Stiftung reports that Fidesz has adopted Jobbik policies on utility price cuts, conversion of foreign currency loans, granting citizenship to Hungarians living abroad, and furthering ties with Russia and Turkey (ibid. 2 June 2015). Political Capital notes that Fidesz has adopted Jobbik policies on building closer ties with China, Russia and Turkey, "diminishing Hungary's role in WWII," stricter immigration and refugee policies, increasing taxes on multinational corporations, nationalization of the financial and utility sectors, obtaining nuclear energy from Russia, terminating mandatory enrollment in the private pension system, tying social benefits to participation in a "public works program," mandatory religious or ethics education in public schools, and a potential reintroduction of the death penalty (15 May 2015).

1.2 Activities

A report by the EU's Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA), which provides information to member states on issues of rights and community law (UN n.d.), states that on 29 November 2013, "media reported that Jobbik and uniformed members of the New Hungarian Guard staged a 'demonstration of public security' and a torch-lit march in the city of Kaba" (EU 2013, 40). Corroborating information could not be found among the sources consulted by the Research Directorate within the time constraints of this Response.

Sources state that Jobbik softened its extremist rhetoric (AP 13 Apr. 2015; EurActiv and Reuters 1 Apr. 2015; Feffer 30 June 2014) during the 2014 elections to appear as a "more centrist" party (ibid.). Sources note that this was done to appeal to Fidesz voters (The Guardian 9 Apr. 2014; EUobserver 13 Apr. [2015]) who are "disillusioned" with the party (ibid.). In an interview with Reuters, the leader of the Jobbik Party, Gabor Vona, reportedly stated that "Jobbik would break with its extremist past even in the face of resistance within his party" and was quoted as saying that "[w]ith time the (extremist) elements of Jobbik you may see as prevalent will fade out because they no longer find their calling here" (Reuters 14 Apr. 2015).

Sources state that critics are doubtful that this is a permanent change (EurActiv and Reuters 1 Apr. 2015; Council of Europe 16 Dec. 2014, para. 77). BBC similarly reports that Jobbik "has tried to soften its image" but that it "remains committed to defending conservative Hungarian values and thwarting the integration of Roma communities" (BBC 13 Oct. 2014).

Human Rights First reports that Jobbik has filed lawsuits to "defend its reputation" (Human Rights First Aug. 2014, 55). Sources report that Jobbik filed a lawsuit against a Hungarian TV broadcaster for describing Jobbik as a "far right party," claiming that since Jobbik does not describe itself as such, it violates a restriction on expressing opinions rather than verified facts in news commentary (International Business Times 6 June 2014; Human Rights First Aug. 2014, 55). The Supreme Court reportedly upheld the ruling in favour of Jobbik (ibid.; International Business Times 6 June 2014).

1.3 Relationship with Roma, Including Incidences of Violence or Discrimination

According to the Council of Europe's Commissioner for Human Rights, Jobbik is closely linked to "paramilitary organisations or groups carrying out acts of intimidation against minority groups, notably Roma" (16 Dec. 2014, para. 76). However, Reuters reports that Jobbik rejects "any link between the growing strength of radical nationalists and violence" and that they condemn acts of violence (9 Apr. 2014). Human Rights First similarly reports that Jobbik denies being involved with any violence against Roma and states further that the party's claims of non-involvement are "impossible to disprove since the Hungarian government…has systematically failed to investigate, prosecute, and punish those responsible for hate attacks" (Aug. 2014, 51). Corroboration for this statement could not be found among the sources consulted by the Research Directorate within the time constraints of this Response.

Sources state that Jobbik candidate Lajos Rig, who won the by-election in Tapolca in 2015, made Facebook posts describing Roma as a "weapon" used by "the Jews" against Hungarians (The Economist 18 Apr. 2015; Political Capital 13 Apr. 2015).

Feffer quotes Jobbik parliamentary representative Tamas Hegedu as stating that Roma who agree with the changes that Jobbik advocates for would be considered "partners" (Feffer 30 Apr. 2014). Hegedu was also quoted as stating that "[w]hether we like it or not, the villages where there's a disproportionate number of Gypsies, public safety is threatened" and that

there is such a thing as Roma criminality. They accuse us of saying that all Roma are criminals, but we are not saying that. But, Roma are overrepresented in criminal activity, and there are certain kinds of criminal acts that are typical of Roma…but it is not necessarily true of all Roma. (ibid.) [Emphasis in original]

A report from the François-Xavier Bagnoud Center (FXB Center) for Health and Human Rights at the Harvard School of Public Health, Harvard University, states that Jobbik organized an anti-Roma march on 12 January 2013 in Szigethalom which "hundreds" attended (FXB Center Feb. 2014, 39). The same source reports that

Jobbik's Vice President János Volner stated that "only Jobbik can solve the problem of Gypsy crime after it has taken power." His response came after two athletes were stabbed at a sports club in Szigethalom on New Year's Eve, and a young Roma was a suspect. After demanding a more radical law enforcement approach towards the issue of "Gypsy crime," Jobbik spokesman Adam Mirkoczki referred to the attack as a "typical and vile example of Gypsy terror." (ibid.)

2. Overview: The Hungarian Guard

According to sources, the Hungarian Guard [Magyar Garda (The Independent 22 Jan. 2014)] was a paramilitary wing of the Jobbik Party (Reuters 9 Apr. 2014; The Independent 22 Jan. 2014). Sources state that the Hungarian Guard was banned in 2009 (EU 2013, 40; Bertelsmaan Stiftung 2014, 13). Sources state that the party then formed into different factions (ibid.; Feffer 30 Apr. 2014). These factions include the Uj Magyar Garda (New Hungarian Guard) (EU 2013, 13; Norwegian Helsinki Committee Jan. 2013, 33) and the Magyar Nemzeti Garda (Hungarian National Guard) (ibid.).

For further information on the Hungarian Guard, including history and past activities, see Response to Information Request HUN103810.

2.1 New Hungarian Guard

Sources note that the New Hungarian Guard was created immediately following the banning of the Hungarian Guard (Council of Europe 16 Dec. 2014, para. 88; Athena Institute 7 July 2014b). The Athena Institute, a Budapest-based independent research organization that focuses on domestic extremism and terrorism (Athena Institute n.d.a), describes the New Hungarian Guard as espousing a "far-right racist, anti-Semitic and homophobic ideology" (Athena Institute 7 July 2014b). The same source further states that the group was formed in 2009, has approximately 200 members and is led by Istvan Mészáros and Henrik Ferenczi (ibid.). Sources note that as of July 2014, the New Hungarian Guard was still active (ibid. 7 July 2014b; Council of Europe 16 Dec. 2014, para. 88).

2.1.1 Activities

The Athena Institute reports on the following activities, among others, involving the New Hungarian Guard between 2013 and 2014:

In mid-January 2013, a parliamentary party signed a declaration of cooperation with several extremist groups in Debrecen. The groups are: the New Hungarian Guard, the National Protection Force, the For a Better Future Hungarian Self Defence and the Sixty-four Counties Youth Movement.

In early March, 2013, a parliamentary party opened a new office in Dunaújváros where they also provide office space for the New Hungarian Guard and the Sixty-four Counties Youth Movement extremist groups.

At the end of April, 2013, the New Hungarian Guard held a military-like training for the extremist members of the organisation.

In mid-May, 2013, the New Hungarian Guard extremist group was trying to recruit new members all over the country.

In late July, 2013, the New Hungarian Guard held a military-like training at Nagymágocs.

In early August, 2013, the New Hungarian Guard appointed new "gendarmes," continuing to pose in the role of the Hungarian authorities.

In early October, 2013, a parliamentary party and the New Hungarian Guard carried out a joint propaganda action at Soroksár. Several members of the extremist group wore uniforms similar to the banned Hungarian Guard uniforms

In late May, 2014, the New Hungarian Guard held a military-like training in the Matra. (7 July 2014b)

2.2 Hungarian National Guard

The Athena Institute explains that the Hungarian National Guard resulted from the "second split of the original Hungarian Guard," and that it is a splinter group with approximately 100 members that continues to operate "independently," including holding minor rallies and "propaganda campaigns" (ibid. 7 July 2014a).

2.2.1 Activities

The Athena Institute reports on the following activities, among others, involving the Hungarian National Guard between 2013 and 2014:

In late November, 2013, the Hungarian National Guard tried to recruit new members in Dunaújváros

At the end of March, 2014, the Hungarian National Guard and a parliamentary party carried out a joint propaganda action in Budapest.

In late May, 2014, the Hungarian National Guard established a new subgroup in Somogy County.

In early July, 2014, the New Hungarian Guard, the Hungarian National Guard and a parliamentary party carried out a joint propaganda action in Budapest. (ibid.)

According to the Athena Institute, in late May 2013, the Hungarian National Guard, the Sixty-four Counties Youth Movement and a "parliamentary party" carried out a joint "propaganda action" in Budapest (7 July 2014a). Channel 4 News, a UK-based "publicly-owned, commercially-funded public service broadcaster" (Channel 4 n.d.), similarly reported on a Jobbik rally in late May 2013 in Budapest that drew "over 7,000 people," including "Nazi-tattoo-wearing skinheads" (ibid. 27 May 2013). During the rally a "training session" by the Hungarian National Guard was held; the group wore "full military uniforms, displayed a clear military-style structure, but claimed it was not a violent organisation" (ibid.). The same source reports that the leader of the group stated that "'[w]e have a domestic problem that is the gypsy criminality and an external problem that is the Jew expansion" (ibid.).

Further and corroborating information on these instances could not be found among the sources consulted by the Research Directorate within the time constraints of this Response.

2.3 Impact on the Government

Information on the impact of the New Hungarian Guard or the Hungarian National Guard on the government could not be found among the sources consulted by the Research Directorate within the time constraints of this Response.

2.4 Relationship with Roma, Including Incidences of Violence or Discrimination

In his interview with John Feffer, Tamas Hegedu is quoted as stating that members of the Hungarian Guard are not violent people and that "people might find the marches that they are organizing threatening. But they are unarmed" (Feffer 30 Apr. 2014). He is further quoted as stating that in the locations where the Guard was active and had local support, it was the local Hungarian population that felt unsafe and that they were not being protected by the state (ibid.).

Agence France-Presse (AFP) reports that New Hungarian Guard leader Istvan Mészáros stated in early April 2014 that "'respectable Gypsies' have nothing to fear" (7 Apr. 2014). AFP also reports that Meszaros, a Jobbik candidate from Baja, stated that crime drops in those areas where the party has held marches in Roma neighbourhoods and that "Jobbik offers action, not just talk" (4 Apr. 2014). AFP quotes the head of the Athena Institute as stating that "'[h]aving Meszaros as a [Jobbik] candidate keeps their more extreme voters on board'" (ibid.).

The Athena Institute reports the following interactions, among others, between the New Hungarian Guard and/or the Hungarian National Guard and Roma communities:

In early January 2013, the New Hungarian Guard and the For a Better Future Hungarian Self Defence extremist groups joined the hostile propaganda action of a parliamentary party against the Hungarian Roma Community that took place at Szigethalom.

In mid-January 2013, after the Sixty-four Counties Youth Movement, several other extremist groups joined the hostile anti-Roma propaganda campaign of a parliamentary party at Miskolc, through which they try to block the establishment of a Roma cultural centre, further inciting the ethnic tensions amongst the locals. The campaign was joined by the For a Better Future Hungarian Self Defence, the New Hungarian Guard, the Hungarian National Guard and the National Protection Force.

In late January, 2013, the New Hungarian Guard carried out another hostile propaganda action against the local Roma community.

At the end of January, 2013, the New Hungarian Guard carried out an intimidating hostile propaganda action at Akasztó against the local Roma community.

In early April, 2013, the New Hungarian Guard and the National Protection Force carried out an anti-Roma propaganda action at Bodaszolo.

In late June, 2013, the For a Better Future Hungarian Self Defence, the New Hungarian Guard, the Hungarian National Guard, the Outlaws' Army, the Sixty-four Counties Youth movement and a parliamentary party carried out an anti-Roma propaganda action at Karcag.

In mid-September, 2013, the Hungarian National Guard, the For a Better Future Hungarian Self Defence and the Guards of the Carpathian Homeland carried out a hostile propaganda action against the Hungarian Roma community in Valkó.

In late September, 2013, the New Hungarian Guard, the Sixty-four Counties Youth Movement, the Outlaws' Army and a parliamentary party carried out a hostile propaganda action against the Hungarian Roma community at Németkér.

In mid-October, 2013, the New Hungarian Guard and a parliamentary party carried out a joint anti-Roma propaganda action at Olaszliszka.

In late November 2013 a parliamentary party and the New Hungarian Guard extremist group carried out a joint anti-Roma propaganda action at Kaba (Athena Institute 7 July 2014b)

3. Other Groups in Hungary

According to a 2014 report by the Council of Europe's Commissioner for Human Rights, one of his key concerns is the "growing visible presence of extremist organisations in the last [few] years" (Council of Europe 16 Dec. 2014, para. 76). Without providing further detail, Human Rights First states that some extremist groups operate as movements "that are not registered legal entities, so that they cannot be banned" (Aug. 2014, 57).

The Athena Institute notes that the following are other groups operating in Hungary: For a Better Future Hungarian Self Defence, Guards of the Carpathian Homeland Movement, Hungarian National Front, Outlaws' Army, and the Sixty-Four Counties Youth Movement (Athena Institute n.d.b). The same source also noted the following "watchlisted" organisations: Arrabona NS Crew, Blood and Honour Hungary, Conscience 88 Group, National Protection Force Heritage and Civil Guard Association, NS Straight Edge, Pax Hungarica, and Skins4skinS Hungary (ibid.).

4. State Response

The Athena Institute reports that police "did not intervene" at an October 2013 "propaganda action" by "a parliamentary party" and the New Hungarian Guard in Soroksar (7 July 2014b).

According to the Athena Institute, in March 2013, the Kalocsa prosecutor's office

passed a resolution that essentially states that the New Hungarian Guard is fundamentally identical to the original Hungarian Guard. Based on this resolution the prosecutor's office suspects the two leaders of the New Hungarian Guard extremist group, István Mészáros and Henrik Ferenczi, of having committed the felony of 'abusing the freedom of assembly'. (ibid.)

The source notes that Mészáros had planned to run as a candidate of a "parliamentary party in the coming general elections" and therefore enjoyed immunity (ibid.). The source reports that in March 2014, the National Election Committee suspended his immunity (ibid.).

Without providing further detail, the Athena Institute notes that most of the actions of the Hungarian National Guard are "followed-up by national police intervention" (7 July 2014a).

Further information on state response to the activities of the Jobbik, New Hungarian Guard and Hungarian National Guard could not be found among the sources consulted by the Research Directorate within the time constraints of this Response. However, the following information may be useful.

Sources state that in August 2013 four men charged with the racially-motivated murder of six Roma in 2008-2009 were found guilty (US 25 June 2015, 56; AI 6 Aug. 2013). Three of the four received life sentences and the fourth received 13 years imprisonment (ibid.; US 25 June 2015, 56). Country Reports 2014 states that the fourth individual had cooperated with police and was charged as an "accomplice" (ibid). The same source notes that the defendants appealed the verdict and the case was still pending at the end of 2014 (ibid.). Further and corroborating information could not be found among the sources consulted by the Research Directorate within the time constraints of this Response.

For information on police efficiency and responses to complaints made by Roma, including hate crimes, see Response to Information Request HUN105196.

This Response was prepared after researching publicly accessible information currently available to the Research Directorate within time constraints. This Response is not, and does not purport to be, conclusive as to the merit of any particular claim for refugee protection. Please find below the list of sources consulted in researching this Information Request.

Notes

[1] FPIF "connects" the work of over 600 "scholars, advocates and activists" and "provides timely analysis of US foreign policy and international affairs and recommends policy alternatives" (FPIF n.d.). The Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) is a US-based "multi-issue" think tank comprised of "public scholars and organizers" that serves as a "policy and research resource" for local and global social justice movements (IPS n.d.). In addition to being the Director of the FPIS, John Feffer is also the author of several books and articles on US foreign policy in Europe (Feffer n.d.).

[2] The BTI, published by Bertelsmann Stiftung, assesses the transformation toward democracy and a market economy, as well as the quality of political management, in 129 countries (Bertelsmann Stiftung 2014, 1).

References

Agence France-Presse (AFP). 7 April 2014. Patrick Murphy. "Hungary's 'neo-Nazi' Jobbik Gains with Image Shift." [Accessed 23 June 2015]

_____. 4 April 2014. "Hungary's Rebranded Far-right Eyes Success in Sunday's Polls." [Accessed 24 June 2015]

Amnesty International (AI). 6 August 2013. "Hungary: Murder Convictions Are 'Wake-up Call' over Hate Crimes Against Roma." [Accessed 26 June 2015]

Associated Press (AP). 13 April 2015. Pablo Gorondi. "Hungary's Far-right Jobbik Party Vows to Prune Racism Ahead of Elections." [Accessed 23 June 2015]

Athena Institute. 7 July 2014a. "Hungarian National Guard." [Accessed 26 June 2015]

_____. 7 July 2014b. "New Hungarian Guard." [Accessed 26 June 2015]

_____. N.d.a. "About the Institute." [Accessed 26 June 2015]

____. N.d.b. "Identified Domestic Extremist Groups." [Accessed 26 June 2015]

Bertelsmann Stiftung. 2014. BTI 2014: Hungary Country Report. [Accessed 23 June 2015]

_____. N.d. "The Beliefs Behind Our Work." [Accessed 26 June 2015]

British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC). 13 October 2014. "Hungary's Far-right Jobbik Makes Local Election Gains." [Accessed 23 June 2015]

Channel 4. 27 May 2013. "On the Streets with Hungary's Far-right." [Accessed 24 June 2015]

_____. N.d. "About C4." [Accessed 26 June 2015]

Council of Europe. 16 December 2014. Commissioner for Human Rights. Report by Nils Muiznieks, Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe, Following His Visit to Hungary From 1 to 4 July 2014. (CommDH(2014)21) [Accessed 23 June 2015]

The Economist.18 April 2015. "On the March: Jobbik's First Direct Election Win Bodes Ill for Viktor Orban's Fidesz Party." [Accessed 23 June 2015]

EUobserver. 13 April [2015]. Adam Halasz. "Landmark Win by Jobbik Poses Challenge to Hungarian PM." [Accessed 23 June 2015]

EurActiv and Reuters. 1 April 2015. "Hungary's far-right Jobbik Party Challenges for Power." [Accessed 23 June 2015]

European Union (EU). 2013. Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA). Racism, Discrimination, Intolerance and Extremism: Learning from Experiences in Greece and Hungary. [Accessed 17 June 2015]

Feffer, John. 30 April 2014. "Jobbik: Looking East." Interpreted by Judit Hatfaludi. [Accessed 24 June 2015]

_____. N.d. "About." [Accessed 9 July 2015]

Foreign Policy in Focus (FPIF), Institute for Policy Studies (IPS). N.d. "About." [Accessed 9 July 2015]

François-Xavier Bagnoud Center for Health and Human Rights (FXB Center). February 2014. Harvard School of Public Health, Harvard University. Accelerating Patterns of Anti-Roma Violence in Hungary. [Accessed 30 June 2015]

The Guardian. 9 April 2014. Jan-Werner Mueller. "Hungary's Election Offers some Disturbing Lessons for Europe." [Accessed 24 June 2015]

Heinrich Böll Stiftung. 2 June 2015. Kristof Szombati. "Why Hungarian Voters Are Turning Away from Fidesz and Towards Jobbik." [Accessed 23 June 2015]

_____. N.d. "Who We Are and What We Do. An Introduction to Our Foundation." [Accessed 26 June 2015]

Human Rights First. August 2014. We're Not Nazis, but… The Rise of Hate Parties in Hungary and Greece and Why America Should Care. [Accessed 23 June 2015]

_____. N.d. "About Us." [Accessed 26 June 2015]

The Independent. 22 January 2014. Owen Jones. "A Visit by the Leader of Hungary's Poisonous Jobbik Party Reminds Us That We Can't Just Wish Away anti-Semitism." [Accessed 10 July 2015]

International Business Times. 6 June 2014. Gianluca Mezzofiore. "Hungary Court Forbids Calling Jobbik 'Far-right'." [Accessed 24 June 2015]

Institute for Policy Studies (IPS). N.d. "About." [Accessed 26 June 2015]

The Jewish Chronicle. 8 April 2015. Michael Goldfarb. "Why Hate Party Jobbik is Surging." [Accessed 23 June 2015]

Jobbik. 24 October 2003. "Manifesto." [Accessed 24 June 20015]

Norwegian Helsinki Committee. January 2013. Democracy and Human Rights at Stake in Hungary: The Viktor Orban Government's Drive for Centralisation of Power. [Accessed 23 June 2015]

The New York Times. 17 March 2015. Kim Lane Scheppele. "Hungary Without Two Thirds." [Accessed 23 June 2015]

Political Capital. 15 May 2015. "Jobbik's Policy Proposals Realized by Fidesz: A Summary in 10 Points." [Accessed 23 June 2015]

_____. 13 April 2015. Jobbik Won its First Individual Constituency: Reasons and Consequences. [Accessed 23 June 2015]

_____. 13 October 2014. Jobbik Extended its Influence in the Municipalities. [Accessed 23 June 2015]

_____. N.d. "About Us." [Accessed 26 June 2015]

Political Handbook of the World 2014 (PHW). 2014. "Hungary." Edited by Tom Lansford. Washington, DC: CQ Press. <<http://library.cqpress.com/phw/document.php?id=phw2014_Hungary&type=query&num=HUngary&> [Accessed 14 July 2015]

Pulitzer Center. 15 September 2014. Yigal Schleifer. "Hungary at the Turning Point." [Accessed 24 June 2015]

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). 31 October 2014. Robert Coalson. "Twenty-five Years After Fall of Berlin Wall, Hungary Lurches Away from Democracy." [Accessed 23 June 2015]

Reuters. 14 April 2015. Marton Dunai. "Hungary's Jobbik Drops Some Hardline Policies in Push for Power." [Accessed 23 June 2015]

_____. 9 April 2014. Marcin Goettig and Christian Lowe. "Special Report: From Hungary, Far-right Party Spreads Ideology, Tactics." [Accessed 23 June 2015]

United Nations (UN). N.d. "European Union: European Agency for Fundamental Rights." [Accessed 26 June 2015]

United States (US). 25 June 2015. "Hungary." Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2014. [Accessed 26 June 2015]

Additional Sources Consulted

Oral sources: The following were unable to provide information for this Response: Hungarian Helsinki Committee, Transparency International - Hungary.

Attempts to contact the following were unsuccessful within the time constraints of this Response: European Roma Rights Center, Political Capital.

Internet sites, including: Canadian Broadcasting Corporation; ecoi.net; Factiva; Freedom House; Human Rights Watch; Institute for War and Peace Reporting; Minority Rights Group International; New Europe; United Nations - Refworld.