Hungary lifts immunity of prime minister and two former ministers
The Hungarian parliament unanimously approved criminal proceedings against three prominent politicians.
The Hungarian parliament on Monday lifted the parliamentary immunity of Prime Minister Péter Magyar and former ministers Balázs Hankó and Miklós Seszták. The decision allows investigations into the three politicians to continue, although it says nothing about their guilt.
According to Hungarian news media, the Hungarian National Assembly voted by 139 votes to lift the immunity of the three MPs. Parliament took the decision during an extraordinary sitting in Budapest.
The cases differ from one another. The case involving Magyar concerns an investigation into an incident involving a mobile phone in 2024. The requests concerning Hankó and Seszták stem from other criminal cases. The public prosecutor had asked parliament to lift the protection of all three.
Magyar had previously said that he wanted his own immunity lifted. His government presents the step as applying the principle that ministers and MPs, too, must be subject to investigation under the law. On its website, the prosecutor emphasises that requests to lift immunity must be handled according to legal and professional criteria, without political interference.
Parliamentary immunity does not protect a representative from substantive assessment by a judge. Lifting it makes it possible for the criminal investigation to continue without that parliamentary hurdle. Prosecution, let alone a conviction, does not automatically follow.
The vote is politically sensitive because Magyar has only been prime minister since this spring and his Tisza party has a large majority following the election. His government is seeking to roll back the political and legal legacy of Viktor Orbán’s long Fidesz period. Hankó was a minister during the previous government term, and Seszták also held a ministerial post under Fidesz.
The Fidesz opposition may see the decision as part of a political reckoning. The government, by contrast, may argue that public legal proceedings are precisely what is needed to test suspicions of abuse. The next step lies with the Public Prosecutor’s Office and the competent judicial authorities; parliament has not established the question of guilt.
The decision could also affect the debate over the scope of parliamentary protection. Magyar has proposed further limiting the arrangement for certain public prosecutions. Supporters see this as promoting greater equality before the law, while opponents fear that a majority could weaken protection for political opponents.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- Parliament lifted the immunity of three MPs.
- One of the cases concerns Prime Minister Péter Magyar.
- The vote did not establish guilt.
Left
Arguments Sees the vote as a necessary step to bring office-holders and former holders of power under the same legal rules as other citizens.
Values Equality before the law, transparency and combating corruption.
Consequences Expects greater trust if investigations can proceed independently, but warns against political interference in the justice system.
Centre
Arguments Supports an investigation without identifying a political culprit in advance and wants prosecutors and judges to act demonstrably independently.
Values Rule-of-law procedures, evidence and institutional restraint.
Consequences Emphasises that both prosecution and acquittal must be credible and that parliament must not replace the courts.
Right
Arguments May see the vote as a power tool used by the new majority against former government politicians and as a risk to political stability.
Values Political pluralism, protection of the opposition and restrained use of state power.
Consequences Fears that parliamentary protection will be hollowed out and that future majorities will use the same means against their opponents.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The core facts about the vote, the politicians involved and the procedure have been confirmed by Hungarian news sources and the prosecutor-general. The text makes clear that lifting immunity is not a judgement on guilt.
- confirmed The Hungarian parliament lifted the immunity of Péter Magyar, Balázs Hankó and Miklós Seszták. — Reported by 444.hu and 24.hu. source
- confirmed The vote received 139 votes in favour. — The figure is cited by 444.hu. source
- confirmed The Hungarian prosecutor-general says requests are handled according to legal and professional criteria. — This is stated in the response from the Hungarian Public Prosecutor’s Office. source
- confirmed Lifting immunity allows a criminal investigation to continue, but does not prove guilt. — The procedural significance follows from reporting on the requests; the text does not present guilt as an established fact. source
Editor's note
The vote and the politicians involved have been reported by multiple Hungarian sources. The substance of the underlying investigations is only partly public; guilt or political motives have not been established.Sources
- Hankó, Seszták en Magyar mentelmi jogát is kiadta a parlament — 444.hu
- Felfüggesztették Hankóék mentelmi jogát — 24.hu
- A Legfőbb Ügyészség reagálása dr. Magyar Péter miniszterelnök ma esti videóüzenetére — Hongaarse procureur-generaal