Anti-Semitism and Judicature in Hungary

FOREWORD

We recently commemorated the 25^th anniversary of the death of the immortal genius of Hungarian political essay-writing, István Bibó. We also squarely faced the fact that his work entitled The Jewish Question in Hungary After 1944, as the direct continuation of the one entitled Distorted Hungarian Character, Hungarian History - a Dead End Street, was an incredibly exciting and important piece, and not only because the author himself was not of Jewish origin. It was exciting and important at least as much on account of the fact that Bibó, an intellectual gaining consciousness from the works of the ‘popular writers’, an academic who began his political career with the Smallholders and a politician with an abortive career, had been an anti-Semite before World War II. It was the German and Hungarian persecutions of the Jews that would lead Bibó to become a part of Jewish rescue operations, while it was the revival of anti-Semitism following the Holocaust that drove him to state in his study on the Jewish question: anti-Jewishness is a grave illness of Hungarian society which should be dealt with primarily by the non-Jewish population, rather than by the Jews themselves; they must face it, analyse it, dispute it and fight it.

Bibó’s study, which manifested overwhelming moral integrity, remained a utopia, a pleasant dream – it was hushed up, then discovered, quoted and eventually forgotten. In our time, whole new generations grow up without even knowing his name. The political right wing, the churches that entered into a false alliance with them and the extreme right have never been happier; Bibó’s analysis with its crystal clear logic and perfect precision, is for them what incense is for the devil.

One of the keys to Bibó’s social analysis is the clear demonstration of the ‘a drop in the ocean’ phenomenon. The fact that each of the events, phenomena and processes occurring in society tells us something about the whole of society, if nothing else, about the psychological distortions, the hidden fears, the scapegoat theories in the making, the informal networks and the distortions of power which are hidden deep down.

The ‘drop’ which we are going to deal with herein is, however, not a single drop in the Hungarian ‘ocean’. Dr. György Ádám’s case study and series of theoretical commentary attached to the legal documents of the case testify to the state of the Hungarian psyche which is still gravely distorted and to the waves that still batter the ‘ocean’ of a sick society: the survival of anti-Semitism. They point to the fact that there are forces which ride the wave of anti-Jewish sentiments – some merely allow this to happen, others support it one way or another; some exploit it in the service of presumed political interests, others play along vehemently to gain votes thereby, and so on. And they also testify to the fact that one of the worst ‘surges’ is battering our shores: anti-Jewishness suddenly found an ally which has terrifying power as well as an inner network that is completely hidden from the public. The ally in question is the judiciary.

Professor Ádám had previously demonstrated in the field of medical malpractice that there was, completely concealed from and almost impenetrable to the public, a sneaking complicity, hidden cooperation and implicit and unprincipled alliance, between the medical profession and the network which is called judiciary.

This time, he proves in another area, the realm of anti-Semitism, that the Hungarian judiciary is not only dysfunctional but is also a hidden ally of anti-Semitism.

Is this true of the whole of the legal profession, of every judge? Of course, not. There are a great number of judges who pass their judgements with a high degree of integrity and morality and true impartiality. Yet, those who read the story of György Ádám’s lawsuit will have to face the fact that in terms of the general picture of the judicature and the main tendency that emerges from the final result appear to testify to this horrible assertion. They show that incontrovertible arguments, impeccable logical deductions and clear evidence may, with impunity, be answered with vacuous phrases, ridiculous logical non sequiturs and, what is more, blatant illegality.

No one has demonstrated it to the public, yet everyone who works in the administration of justice knows that an intensely autocratic regime operates within the court system. The judges are subordinated to superiors who use and sometimes abuse their power. Embedded in amicable banter, they drop clues as to what judgements should be passed in which cases; they issue nonsensical instructions to judges under the pretence of standardisation; they force political guidelines upon the judges proceeding in specific cases; they sanction tacit illegalities time and time again. Always and permanently? Oh no, not at all. Only when it truly matters. Only when it comes to senior figures. For instance, in giving the go-ahead to intolerable processes in defence of the ‘thousand-year-old Christian Hungary’ which some claim as their holy mission.

Some of the senior members of the Hungarian Bar have caused this ‘surge of the sea’ deliberately. It may lead to a tsunami.