K-Monitor
Cases- Location of case in SG report
- 2018-052-001
- Relevant SG report
- Year of the report
- 2018
- From Country
- Country Geolocation
Latitude: 47.162494
Longitude: 19.5033041
- Country Geolocation (linked Cases)
- Hungary
- From Region
- Type of record
- Named organization
- Was the victim a foreign national?
- No
- Was the victim a minor?
- No
- Individual's/organization's activity
a Hungarian anti-corruption non-governmental organisation
- Type of rights defended
- Corruption
- Was the victim a civil servant, member of the security forces or of the judiciary?
- No
- Reported trigger of reprisal
Seeking to engage with Conference of States Parties to the United Nations Convention against Corruption in Vienna in November 2017
- Engagement with UN body
- UN thematic world conference
- Dates of engagement
- November 2017
- Type of attempted engagement
- Participation in meeting on UN premises
- Dates of mentioned reprisals
- November 2017
- Reprisal information
There were reported efforts to place obstacles in the way of the participation by the conference of organizations working on issues related to corruption by authorities. The Bureau of States Parties of the Conference, voted against the objection of the State and applied rule 17 paragraph 2 of the Rules of Procedure of the Conference in relation to the participation of non-governmental organizations (see CAC/COSP/2017/14, para. 25). While K-Monitor was able to resume their participation, there are concerns that the objection seemed to be a reprisal for cooperation with the United Nations in regard to its anti- corruption advocacy.
- Types of reprisals suffered
- Access to UN premises denied
- Alleged/likely perpetrators
- State actors
- Was the reprisal based on new legislation?
- No
- Does the report make general comment about country’s environment for engagement with UN?
- No
- Government response dates
- 3 August 2018
- Government response content
the Government stated that the objection was related to the organization’s non-compliance with Hungarian legislation, and that making objections in compliance with the provisions of the Conference’s Rules of Procedure are legitimate and should not be considered a reprisal.
- 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