SECURITY SERVICE SURVEILLANCE AND POLITICIANS

11 September 2011

What are we to make of the recent allegations in Heti Válasz that the Hungarian State Security Service had been collecting information on Viktor Orbán and László Kövér whilst they were in political opposition to the Socialist government of Ferenc Gyurcsány?

Should the allegations – which are now being officially investigated – prove to be true, then it really does flag up a number of problems in Hungary.  First, it would indicate that the then Prime Minister Gyurcsány, if he were directly involved, had undermined democracy in his own country.  However, even if he were not directly involved, it would suggest that his officials and close political allies – in particular Sándor Laborc – had both abused their power and indulged in political chicanery.  Furthermore, his lack of control of his security service must be a clear failure of leadership.  Either way, the affair will do no favours to the former prime minister who is already under fire over allegations of impropriety regarding the Sukoró financial scandal.

Second, the affair would suggest that the Hungarian State Security Service had been politicised to a degree that is unhealthy for democracy and damaging to the national interest.  Any security service which fails to detect or recognise a rogue operation within its ranks might equally have difficulties in recognising a penetration operation by a hostile foreign service.  One must wonder what allied security services in NATO for example are thinking of this?

Third, if the allegations are proven, then Prime Minister Orbán – one of the subjects of the illegal surveillance operation – must move quickly to root out disloyalty in the service and to re-establish its professional credibility and political neutrality.  This will not be easy but a situation cannot exist where the Prime Minister of an EU and NATO country cannot trust his security service.

So far, the international media has failed to dwell overly on this issue, which is surprising, given their concern of late for democracy in Hungary.  State-sponsored domestic surveillance of opposition politicians is as much a threat to democracy in the EU as a revision of a constitution or the introduction of a new media law.  Perhaps the Financial Times, one of those international media outlets which had recently expressed their concern for democracy in Hungary might consider reporting this affair?  Where are you Kester Eddy?