Constitutional Court says public media have duty not to spread lies

The Hungarian Civil Liberties Union has announced on their blog that the Constitutional Court has ruled in their favour in the lawsuit where they represented Menedék Egyesület (Menedék – Hungarian Association for Migrants) against the public broadcasting service, MTVA. The association complained that in 2018, when the public media unilaterally reported on a press conference of the pro-government organisation, Ifjúsági Kereszténydemokrata Szövetség (Young Christians’ Democratic Alliance, (YCDA) it was in fact disseminating lies. At the event held in front of the association's office, among other things, members of the YCDA had claimed that the association was turning Hungary into a country of migrants and that they were specifically bringing migrants to Hungary.

At the time, the public broadcaster, MTVA, had published the organization's claims without any criticism. This led to a lawsuit against them, and the Curia convicted the public media of spreading lies and not verifying the truth of what was said, thus damaging the reputation of Menedék and misleading their viewers.

MTVA, however, turned to the Constitutional Court, as in their opinion – pay attention to this -

as journalists, it is not their job to check the veracity of what is said at a press conference.

In fact, the public broadcaster went as far as to say that they believe that it is acceptable for them to even spread blatantly false things, if they are not the ones making the allegations but the person holding the press conference. This is, by the way, common practice not only in the public media, but also at KESMA (Central European Press and Media Foundation – the openly pro-government media holding established by Fidesz in 2018, and which controls a large percentage of the country's media) and other pro-government newspapers, where politicians' statements are published as is – even if the statements made are not true and the other party concerned is never asked to comment. But that is not all!

According to the MTVA, checking their sources and interviewing other stakeholders in fact equals censorship.

The Constitutional Court, on the other hand, has a very different view. According to them, "information on matters affecting communities must always present both opposing views, thereby enabling the public to make informed choices on the issue in dispute." The Constitutional Court also stressed that "exercising the freedom of the press does not in itself extend to the publication of untruths, and in fact one of the main responsibilities of journalists is precisely to verify the authenticity of the news and the information they publish."

They also objected that the public media had not bothered to contact Menedék and added that they could at least have informed their viewers about the rebuttal published on the association's website, but this had not been done either.