Confrontation with Slovakia Orbán is trying to avoid beneficial for Péter Magyar

The first clear sign that the international community considers it a very real possibility that the leader of the Tisza Party could be Hungary's next prime minister came from an unexpected source: the Slovak leadership, who are considered allies of Viktor Orbán. This was prompted by the adoption of a new Slovak law threatening those questioning the Beneš Decrees with a six-month prison sentence. This put the Hungarian government, known for its friendly relations with the Slovak Prime Minister while also attempting to represent the interests of ethnic Hungarians living in the country, in a difficult position.

Although in other, similar international affairs, the Orbán government has been known to immediately protest and do so loudly, this time, their reaction was quite restrained. This provided Magyar with the opportunity to enter a new area of politics, one that has been dominated almost exclusively by Fidesz over the past 15-20 years: the representation of Hungarians living on the other side of the border, in neighbouring countries.

Following previous, more concise statements, however, at last Thursday's government briefing, Gergely Gulyás, Minister of the Prime Minister's Office, said that Slovakia was pursuing an erroneous and bad policy in the case of the Beneš Decrees, and spoke of Hungary's neighbour having crossed a boundary, "to such an extent that we will certainly be able to count on the support of European human rights forums". The Hungarian government has also promised legal assistance to those who have been disadvantaged by the decrees.

Meanwhile, Katalin Szili, the Prime Minister's Chief Advisor responsible for autonomy efforts in the Carpathian Basin, has indicated that she has written an open letter to the President of the European Commission on the matter. We asked the European Commission whether they had received a letter from Szili or whether the Hungarian government had brought the matter before them on any level.

“I can confirm that we did indeed receive a letter, and we are currently looking into the issues raised in it,”

Commission spokesman Markus Lammert said at a press conference on Friday afternoon.

Fico's party passed the bill, Pellegrini signed it

It was at the end of last year that an increasingly heated political debate unfolded in Slovakia concerning the debateability of the Beneš Decrees and the land confiscations carried out on the basis of the legal framework they created, affecting the Hungarian community in particular.

The rules on confiscation date back to the Beneš Decrees, but it was the Slovak National Council in exile that issued the relevant decrees at the end of World War 2. There were many cases in which the confiscations were not carried out at the time, with the Slovak state wanting to make up for this now, decades later.

The debate reached the point where, in December, Fico's government passed a law that, among other things, would punish questioning the Beneš Decrees with imprisonment. The decrees hold Germans and Hungarians collectively responsible for World War II. On December 23, Slovak President Peter Pellegrini signed the related amendment into law.

Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has firmly rejected the Beneš Decrees before, but has been cautious about the steps taken so far. He said that he had already raised the issue with Fico, but still needed to "gather information" on the matter. At the end of December, Gergely Gulyás, Minister of the Prime Minister's Office, said that the government condemns the principle of collective guilt. At the time, the Hungarian government's position on the new Slovak law was that it had not yet been applied to anyone, so there was nothing to protest against. The background to the government's reaction is that Fico has become one of Orbán's most important European allies in the last two years. Additionally, following the return of Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babiš, they are hoping to reinvigorate the V4.

Péter Magyar was much more harsh in his statements. He promised that if the Tisza Party came to power, it would provide the strongest possible diplomatic response to the Slovak legislation threatening Hungarians in Slovakia with imprisonment.

He criticized Orbán for "remaining silent and abandoning the Hungarians of Felvidék, just as he did with our compatriots in Transylvania ” – a reference to Orbán’s words of praise for the anti-Hungarian Romanian politician George Simion prior to the second round of the Romanian presidential election, which Simion ultimately lost. Magyar also said that he would expel the Slovak ambassador in this situation. Finally, in the first week of January, he wrote an open letter to Fico, leaving space at the bottom for Viktor Orbán's signature alongside his own. In the letter, he asked the Slovak head of government to withdraw the amendment and “open the way for dialogue, which can be the basis for peaceful coexistence.”

Pellegrini referred to Magyar as a potential future head of government

Magyar calculated well with his letter. Although Fico did not respond, the Slovak president did so on his behalf, offering no substantive response but objecting to Magyar's referring to Slovakia as "Felvidék" (the historic name of the northern part of what was once the Kingdom of Hungary, and is now mostly present-day Slovakia). Pellegrini was not accurate, because the president of Tisza wrote about "the Felvidék Hungarians," which is a significant difference, because this in no way implied that the term "Felvidék" could be used as a synonym for Slovakia in international communication. So much so that the Hungarian government also regularly and routinely refers to “Hungarians in Felvidék” and neither the Slovak Prime Minister nor the President have ever objected to Szijjártó's or Orbán's similar usage of the term, even at the most recent international press conference.

But Pellegrini – who could have chosen not to respond to the letter addressed to Fico – did Magyar a favor with his reaction. "As President of the Slovak Republic, I will say openly that I find it offensive that the future, potential Hungarian prime minister wrote a letter—not to me, but to the head of our government—and referred to Slovakia as Felvidék." “Future, potential Hungarian prime minister” – this was the first time this phrase had been used at the international level, despite Pellegrini making quotation marks with his fingers when uttering the second adjective in his video statement.

Not only did Magyar receive this unintended gesture, but Fico himself ended up responding, albeit indirectly.

He said that the Slovak government had no intention of getting involved in the Hungarian election campaign, which gave Magyar the opportunity to respond to him while also taking a jab at Orbán. According to Magyar, good neighborly relations are in the interests of both Hungary and Slovakia, so he suggested that Fico use the time that remains until the elections to repeal both the Beneš Decrees and the recently adopted law. "I apologize to all of our Hungarian compatriots in Felvidék for Viktor Orbán's cowardice and evasiveness," wrote the president of Tisza. And his message to Pellegrini was: “I call the geographical regions by the names I learned from my parents and which is how we have called them for a thousand years,” and noted that the Slovak president has a duty to represent the Hungarian minority in Slovakia.

Magyar also scored a victory by pointing out the contradiction between the government's rhetoric and its actions on another sensitive topic besides child protection: the government's statements on Hungarians living beyond the border are generally strong but in this specific case, they have been much more subdued. In early January, there was a protest against the law in front of the Slovak embassy in Budapest, which was not only attended by Péter Magyar and the Tisza Party, but also by Mi Hazánk. As previously reported the president of the Tisza Party has been targeting right-wing voters from the outset, but this has now taken on a new dimension with regard to guest workers and the Beneš Decrees.

The government which routinely summons ambassadors is much more forgiving with Fico

At his hearing before the Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee in early December, Szijjártó settled for saying that while the Beneš decrees are a sensitive issue in Hungarian-Slovak relations, the question should only be opened if there is a realistic chance of resolving it. “We should not open it at all if it carries the risk of reopening previously resolved points of conflict.” This was a few days after the Slovak parliament passed a resolution on the inviolability of the Beneš Decrees, but had not yet passed the law threatening punishment.

On December 18, Szijjártó said that he had spoken with the Slovak Foreign Minister and the Speaker of the House, both of whom assured him that "the regulation is not directed against the Hungarian community, but it is there nevertheless, so we will continue to analyze the situation from a legal and political perspective as closely as possible in the coming days." Five days later, Pellegrini signed an amendment to the Slovak Criminal Code, which came into force on December 27 and stipulates that anyone who questions the Beneš Decrees is punishable by six months in prison.

“Hungarians living in Felvidék or Slovakia can count on the full support of the Hungarian government. […] We do not accept collective guilt, either in our own country or in any other country. Collective guilt is a bad thing. And rules that embody collective guilt are also bad things,” Orbán said at his international press conference on January 5.

At the same time, he noted that the content of the amendment to the Slovak Criminal Code requires explanation. “It is unclear what would happen if I, or someone in Slovakia were to say that the Beneš Decrees are bad, that they lack a moral basis, or if someone were to say that the passages referring to collective guilt are unacceptable. It is unclear whether this would be punishable or not.” In his opinion, whether it is the questioning of the decrees’ existence or saying something bad about them that could lead to punishment is not clear, and he expects the legal situation to be clarified.

Orbán went on to say that he does not see any legal consequences for criticism, even though there have been those who have objected to the Beneš Decrees: "In recent weeks I have seen many people in Slovakia saying that the Beneš Decrees are bad, and there have even been demonstrations. During which they said there that they are bad" – and yet there were no consequences.

However, Orbán appeared to have forgotten that the protests in Slovakia took place before the amendment to the Slovak Criminal Code came into force, not after it had been enacted – incidentally, they were organized by the liberal opposition, essentially in defense of the Hungarian minority in Slovakia, arguing precisely what Orbán stated in the above quote. Szijjártó dismissed this with much the same argument as the Slovak president, namely that these were merely the Slovak opposition's political maneuvers designed to gain an advantage: "Naturally, I have no intention of interfering in Slovak domestic politics, but it seems that they too have parties which only discover the existence of Hungarians in Felvidék when they are in opposition," said Szijjártó, based on Pellegrini's latest statement, in a way that was an insult to Slovakia.

Questioning is one thing, confiscation quite another

Orbán acknowledged that the amendment to the Criminal Code is only part of the problem. The amendment, which came into force in 1945, declares the collective guilt of the Sudeten Germans and the Hungarians of Felvidék, allowing for the expropriation of their property and the revocation of their citizens' rights.

"Indeed, it is not clear from the law itself what is meant by questioning the decrees," Gábor Czímer told Telex. The journalist from Parameter.sk noted that the term "Beneš Decree" does not appear in the law, but it is clear that this is what it refers to. "Anyone who publicly denies or questions the post-World War II settlement, which was established on the basis of legal acts of the representative bodies of the Czechoslovak Republic or the Slovak National Council shall be punished by imprisonment for up to six months," but what is meant by questioning it is unclear. So much so that when János Fiala-Butora, a Slovakian lawyer and human rights activist, reported himself to the police along with two other people, he was the one who had to explain that he had indeed committed a crime based on the amendment, Czímer explained.

However, this is only part of the problem, and Orbán spoke at length about it at his January press conference. He mentioned the other part much more briefly, even though it has been ongoing since at least 2009 and has occurred several times over the past 17 years, without leading to an open debate between the Hungarian and Slovak governments.

This is the case of land that, for some reason, was not confiscated after 1945, but was taken away recently, some 70-80 years later, on the basis of the Beneš Decrees. "The first case I know of is that of Mihály Bosits," said Czímer. In the case, which began in 2009, the state forestry company wanted to enforce a 1946 property confiscation decision, i.e., to take Bosits's land without compensation. The case is still ongoing: the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Slovak state, but Bosits appealed to the Slovak Constitutional Court. His complaint was admitted in December last year, so the final decision will be made there. In 2020, the European Court of Human Rights condemned Slovakia in the Bosits case for violating the right to a fair trial, but it was unable to examine the confiscation of property, on the grounds that it was still ongoing.

Over the past decade and a half, there have been several examples of land being taken without compensation during expropriations prior to the construction of motorways. Before the construction of the new southern and eastern sectors of the ring road around Bratislava, the motorway company began to purchase the affected plots of land and attempted to settle the ownership issues. It was then that the Slovak Land Fund came up with the initiative that the state did not even have to pay for these properties, due to the confiscation decisions from the 1940s. In many cases, the heirs of the original owners were still using these plots, which had been reclaimed after the change of regime.

It seems to be new, but it is an old debate

Nevertheless, it was only at his January press conference that Orbán publicly stated that "as far as I can see, at least from what I have been able to gather so far, the Beneš Decrees are being used as a tool in a legal dispute concerning at least a thousand hectares of farmland. That is what I can see. These are specific impairments of rights and they will have to be dealt with." It was to this that Gergely Gulyás added at last week's government briefing that the government would provide all the assistance possible to those who have been disadvantaged by the Beneš Decrees. However, these statements could have been made at any time over the past decade and a half.

"The Hungarian government has taken some diplomatic steps behind the scenes though," Czímer noted, recalling that in 2022, the debate became more visible to the public when Szijjártó and the then center-right, Christian Democrat-led Slovak government's foreign minister did not sign the minutes of the meeting of the joint committee of the two countries because the Hungarian side objected to the use of the Beneš Decrees. The minutes ended up being signed later, but this did not mean that they agreed on the issue of the decrees.

Czímer points out, however, that after 2020, when Fico's officially center-left, social democratic Smer party was forced into opposition for a time, the Slovak Land Fund initiated fewer transfers of ownership rights citing the Beneš Decrees.

Fico returned to power in the fall of 2023, and the initiative to transfer ownership of land picked up speed in 2024, but especially in 2025: last year, there were three times as many cases like this as in 2023 and 2024 combined,

according to Napunk.sk.

Although it never really stopped, it did gain momentum when Fico, whom Orbán considers an ally, returned to the premiership. Obviously, what makes it difficult for the Hungarian government to take a clear stand against the application of the Beneš Decrees is that Orbán needs to remain on good terms with Fico because he needs him as an ally in his conflicts with Brussels.

The Hungarian government frequently refers to the good Hungarian-Slovak relations, which is something Szijjártó also alluded to when he warned against reopening the issue of the Beneš Decrees. However, there is now noticeable pressure on him, if only because Magyar's letter and the Slovak response to it indicated that the Tisza Party has emerged as a competitor in this political arena as well.

This is why Gergely Gulyás had to declare at last Thursday's government briefing: "We need actions, not words" – adding that the notion of collective guilt is unacceptable in today's Europe, while the Slovak authorities continue to apply the Beneš Decrees to this day. But Gulyás had to go even further, even if unintentionally defending Péter Magyar and criticizing the Slovak reaction. "The question is not whether Slovakia is Felvidék, but whether Slovakia is part of Europe," the minister said then. In his view, good neighborly relations mean nothing on their own if they are not accompanied by respect for the Hungarian minorities living in neighboring countries. This situation is obviously harmful to everyone, including Slovakia, because it is "erroneous and bad politics," and the Beneš Decrees should not even have been considered, he said.

The letter to the European Commission

As for the actions mentioned by Gulyás, one of them could be that the Hungarian government turns to the European Commission with a request to initiate infringement proceedings against Slovakia. Naturally, the decision on the initiation of such proceedings lies with the EC, but the chances of this happening are definitely greater if a member state's government initiates it than if it does not. At Thursday's government briefing, Gulyás said that the new law prohibiting the challenging of the Beneš Decrees, “represents a crossing of boundaries to such an extent that we will certainly be able to count on the support of European human rights forums".

All that is certain for now is that Katalin Szili has sent an open letter to the President of the EC. Viktor Orbán's chief advisor, who broke with the Hungarian Socialist Party (MSZP) in 2010 and moved closer to the government, officially joining the formally separate KDNP three years ago – asked Ursula von der Leyen to “exercise her powers to examine the compatibility of the amendment to the Slovak Criminal Code with EU law and the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and to take the necessary steps to protect fundamental rights.”

When asked whether she had spoken to Orbán prior to writing the letter, Szili said that she had made the "necessary consultations," but that she considered herself autonomous enough to take such a step, Gemist.hu reported. The paper noted that Szili's letter deals only with the amendment of the Slovak Criminal Code, the scope of which does not extend beyond the country's borders and does not affect EU law, so the investigation of the issue "is not a matter for the EU institutions, but for the Slovak Constitutional Court, and should be judged on the basis of the Slovak Constitution, not the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights." In their view, references to the EU are only relevant when it comes to the confiscation of property under the Beneš Decrees, but there is no mention of this in Szili's letter. According to the politician, she did include this in the English version of her letter, but she did not publish this version alongside the Hungarian version of the letter.

“I fully respect the fact that Viktor Orbán's government has turned to the European Commission,”

said Fico, presumably referring to Szili's letter. It is not known whether the government has approached the EC through more official channels. At the regular Commission press conference held on Friday afternoon, Commission spokesman Markus Lammert, responding to a question from Telex about whether they had received a letter from Katalin Szili or whether the Hungarian government had raised the issue at any level, confirmed that they had received a letter and were looking into the issues raised.

We have submitted our questions to the Government Information Center and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade as well. We asked whether the Hungarian government had officially notified the European Commission and, if so, in what form and with what content. Should we receive a response, we will provide an update.