Cooperation with UN entities assisting migrants and refugees
Cases- Location of case in SG report
- 2019-047-002
- Relevant SG report
- Year of the report
- 2019
- From Country
- Country Geolocation
Latitude: 47.162494
Longitude: 19.5033041
- Country Geolocation (linked Cases)
- Hungary
- From Region
- UN body that raised the case prior to the SG report
- UN Special Procedures: Thematic
- Dates of prior UN action
- 10 September 2018
- Type of record
- General situation addressed
- Was the victim a foreign national?
- No
- Was the victim a minor?
- No
- Type of rights defended
- Migrants’/refugees’/IDP’s rights
- Was the victim a civil servant, member of the security forces or of the judiciary?
- No
- Reported trigger of reprisal
The law inevitably restricts cooperation with UN entities assisting migrants and refugees, such as UNHCR.
- Engagement with UN body
- Unclear
- UNHCR
- Type of attempted engagement
- Unclear
- Reprisal information
The mandate holders drew attention to a draft bill, Act VI 2018, which amended certain laws relating to combatting illegal immigration, in particular, the creation of a new criminal offense, punishable with one year of imprisonment, in the Criminal Code of “supporting and facilitating illegal immigration” (HUN 7/2018). They noted that the “bill criminalises any ‘organisational activities’ to assist asylum seekers – already in Hungary or at the border – to exercise their legal rights to submit an asylum procedure or to obtain a residence permit.” They also noted the bill makes it “a crime to organise border monitoring” and “to provide financial means for the above activities.” The law inevitably restricts cooperation with UN entities assisting migrants and refugees, such as UNHCR. The law was found constitutional by the Constitutional Court in March 2019, with the exemption of altruistic action. However, organizations noted that this decision did not clarify how this exemption would be implemented and some reported restrictions in their work.
- Types of reprisals suffered
- Threats/Intimidations (incl. "fear of reprisal")
- Alleged/likely perpetrators
- State actors
- Was the reprisal based on new legislation?
- Yes
- Does the report make general comment about country’s environment for engagement with UN?
- Yes
- Government response dates
- 18 June 2019
- Government response content
Government responded that the allegations were false and inaccurate and based on political bias
- Is the country cited for a "pattern of reprisal" in the context of this case?
- No
- Is a pattern of reprisals mentioned otherwise in the context of this case?
- No
- Does the report cite "self-censorship" as an issue in the context of this case?
- No
- How many times has the case been followed up in subsequent SG reports?
- 0