PM Orbán submits constitutional changes to Parliament
The constitutional amendment, backed by the ruling Fidesz party, will seek to introduce changes to the Fundamental Law for the greater good of the Hungarian people
Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has submitted a constitutional amendment proposal to Parliament in relation to the EU's forced migrant quotas.
The constitutional amendment, backed by the ruling Fidesz party, will seek to introduce changes to the Fundamental Law for the greater good of the Hungarian people.
The move follows a resounding 3.3 million "no" votes in Hungary's historic referendum.
The "no" voters constitute one of the strongest mandates of any vote -- in a referendum or any popular election -- in Hungary since 1989. Rarely have so many Hungarian voters turned out to cast a ballot in support of one cause as they did in the referendum.
The 3.3 million people who voted “no” included roughly one million who support other parties, which proves this was a national issue, PM Orbán said, adding that “these people did not vote against migrants or the European Union, but for the appropriate handling of a modern-age wave of migration".
Due to the overwhelming results of the referendum a “new cross-party bloc” has been created in Hungary, which regards the protection of sovereignty a national issue, the prime minister said.
The proposed changes to the Hungarian Constitution include:
A clear statement on preventing Brussels from ordering the resettlement of migrants to Hungary under a resolution without the consent of the Hungarian parliament.
A ban on mandatory group resettlements.
A declaration that the resettlement of people without the right to free movement and stay in Hungary can only take place on the basis of individual requests assessed by the Hungarian authorities in procedures outlined in Hungarian laws enacted by parliament.
The bill also seeks to change the “national creed” of the constitution, stating “it is the state’s fundamental duty to protect Hungary’s constitutional identity rooted in its historical constitution”.