Hungary has introduced a new legislative proposal aimed at safeguarding national sovereignty by countering covert foreign influence in public life. Titled “On the Transparency of Public Life,” the bill, submitted to Parliament on May 13, 2025, establishes a new regulatory framework targeting organizations that receive foreign funding and participate in shaping Hungarian political discourse. Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s government has made clear that this is not merely about oversight—it is about defending Hungary’s right to self-determination in the face of coordinated international pressure.
Foreign-financed entities—including NGOs and media outlets—have played a central role in disseminating propaganda on critical issues. Those NGOs and media outlets funded from abroad first promoted migration propaganda, then gender propaganda, and now war propaganda. These same organizations are now the primary voices of Ukrainian propaganda aimed at discrediting Hungary. The transparency law is the best tool to act effectively against Ukrainian propaganda.
At the core of the legislation is a newly established registry. Organizations engaging in activities that influence Hungarian public life—such as advocacy during election periods, lobbying in legislative matters, or attempting to sway public opinion—must register if they receive financial support from abroad. Before accepting foreign funds, these organizations must obtain official authorization. Their leaders will be required to file public asset declarations. Any violations, including accepting funds without prior approval, could result in substantial fines—up to 25 times the amount received—or complete exclusion from further public operations.
The Sovereignty Protection Office will oversee the process, identify violators, and have the authority to impose penalties. The aim is not merely administrative—it is strategic. The law targets the covert networks behind Hungary’s recent disinformation campaigns.
Importantly, the proposed law takes inspiration from the United States, drawing a comparison with America’s Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), but Hungary’s version is more sophisticated and much milder. Foreign-financed organizations in the U.S. must also register and face oversight if they act under the influence of foreign powers.
In essence, the idea doesn't come from Moscow, but from Washington.
Public support for the initiative is overwhelming. A recent national consultation revealed that over 98 percent of respondents agreed with the government’s position: Hungary’s democratic institutions should be protected from external manipulation. The consultation, a cornerstone of Hungary’s governance model, reinforced the consensus that Hungarian voters—not foreign donors—should determine the country's political future.
The timing of the bill coincides with increasing accusations from both domestic opposition and foreign actors. Statements by opposition leaders and simultaneous messages from foreign intelligence services, such as those from Ukraine, form a coordinated action, meant to paint Hungary as unstable and warmongering. The new law seeks to expose the actors behind such campaigns and clarify their motivations.
In a broader context, the bill also responds to European legislative efforts that Hungary sees as undermining national sovereignty. A pending EU directive on “European cross-border associations” would allow foreign-funded organizations to operate across member states with limited national oversight. Hungarian authorities argue that this would erode their ability to protect democratic institutions from external interference. The Sovereignty Protection Research Institute warns that this could empower pressure networks with political goals, some of which were implicated in previous scandals involving U.S. and EU funds.
Ultimately, Hungary’s transparency law stands as both a legal and political statement: that democracy in Hungary must remain accountable to Hungarians alone. Far from restricting civic space, the government insists the law restores balance and transparency in political life—anchored not in ideology, but in the nation’s constitutional order.