A conference organized by Republikon Institute in the wake of the Hungarian government’s recent efforts to ban Pride marches brought together politicians and members of civil society to discuss the situation of the LGBTQ community in Hungary and its role in politics. After the opening speech by Gábor Horn, the chairman of the board of Republikon Institute, a first round of discussion featured Dávid Bedő, the parliamentary group leader of Momentum, Zsuzsanna Döme, the co-chair of the Hungarian Two-Tailed Dog Party and deputy mayor of Ferencváros, László Sebián-Petrovszki, the party director of the Democratic Coalition (DK), and the head of the Parliamentary Group for a Diverse Hungary, and Tímea Szabó, the parliamentary group leader of Dialogue (Párbeszéd). In the second panel, Tamás Dombos, a project leader at Háttér Society, András Hodász, an influencer and a former Catholic priest, Zsolt Szekeres, a lawyer at the Hungarian Helsinki Committee, and Kriszta Székely, a theater director, discussed Hungary's backsliding in the field of LGBTQ rights over the past decade and its consequences for the everyday lives of LGBTQ people, civil society organizations’ role in promoting LGBTQ rights and acceptance, and the current state of public discourse around LGBTQ issues in Hungary .
Politicians’ panel
The moderator of the panel, Andrea Virág, emphasized that the situation of sexual minorities in Hungary should be viewed in a broader historical context. She explained that Fidesz has elevated Pride to a major domestic political issue for strategic reasons. Dávid Bedő, leader of the Momentum parliamentary group, concurred, noting that Fidesz's focus on the LGBTQ community stems primarily from cynical political calculation rather than ideological conviction, with the aim of retaining and mobilizing its voter base. In his view, anti-LGBTQ measures have served an increasingly significant power-political function in the governing parties’ agenda since the enactment of the so-called “child-protection” law in 2021. Tímea Szabó, leader of the Dialogue (Párbeszéd) parliamentary group, argued, however, that the government's anti-LGBTQ campaign did not begin in 2021 but can be traced back to the adoption of the Fundamental Law in 2011, which defines marriage exclusively as a union between a man and a woman. László Sebián-Petrovszki also drew attention to the passage of Article 33 in 2020, which effectively eliminated the possibility of legal gender recognition for transgender individuals.
The discussion also addressed how opposition parties should respond to the government's measures to strip LGBTQ individuals of their rights. According to Andrea Virág, the government’s actions put the opposition in a challenging position, given the deep societal divisions in Hungary over issues such as Pride. Tímea Szabó suggested that the government's intention in attempting to ban Pride is to distract the public from other issues, but rejected the notion that the Pride ban is not a “real problem” as well as the term “red herring” (gumicsont) used notably by Péter Magyar, as the government’s anti-LGTQ policies have profoundly harmful effects according to Szabó. Several participants took issue with the fact that the Tisza Party, currently the strongest opposition force, has largely avoided engaging with the topic of Pride and LGBTQ rights and did not attend the conference organized by Republikon. László Sebián-Petrovszki emphasized that defending the LGBTQ community is part and parcel of a broader worldview and should not be reduced to a mere tactical consideration.
On the topic of measures needed to ensure LGBTQ rights, participants highlighted the importance of marriage equality, which Sebián-Petrovszki described as a powerful signal even for those LGBTQ people who may not wish to marry. Tímea Szabó also called for the repeal of all discriminatory laws, the reestablishment of the Equal Treatment Authority, and ensuring the presence of psychiatrists and psychologists in schools. The participants agreed that symbolic gestures (such as displaying a rainbow flag) can be meaningful, though they are not sufficient on their own. Szabó emphasized that the government has a responsibility to promote tolerance, notably through public awareness campaigns. Dávid Bedő, meanwhile, argued that meaningful progress in LGBTQ rights will be possible only following a systemic transformation including a move to a more proportional electoral system and the restoration of political pluralism, which he believes is essential for the effective representation of minority groups.
In connection with this year’s Pride, several participants noted inconsistencies in the government's communication. Bedő stated that he does not consider it likely that the police will disperse the event using force, as the narrative of 2006 police violence remains a key legitimizing tool for Fidesz. However, he suggested the government might attempt to “outsource” violence by denying police protection to the Pride march or, alternatively, that it will instruct the authorities to allow the event to proceed, only to fine as many participants as possible afterward.
Civil society members’ panel
After the break, the conference resumed with a panel discussion moderated by Zoltán Ranschburg, this time featuring participants from civil society. Zsolt Szekeres, a lawyer for the Hungarian Helsinki Committee, recalled that while legal debates have surrounded the organization of Pride events in the past, by last year he believed that Pride was no longer under threat. This year, however—following Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s annual address—the National Assembly adopted two legislative amendments: one to the Fundamental Law and another to the Public Assembly Law. According to Szekeres, the government likely assumed that banning Pride would be straightforward, but this is far from certain: currently, four civil society organizations are in litigation with the police over the banning of a rainbow-themed gathering. Szekeres emphasized that the law—both international treaties and even certain provisions of the Hungarian legal system—remains an important tool that must be utilized to the greatest extent possible to fight against the government’s attempts to restrict LGBTQ rights.
Moderator Zoltán Ranschburg pointed out that the past decade in Hungary has been characterized not only by stagnation but also by regression in LGBTQ rights. Hungary has fallen from ninth to thirty-seventh place over ten years in ILGA-Europe’s ranking of LGBTQ legal protections. Participants agreed that this decline is tangible in everyday life. Kriszta Székely recounted humiliating personal experiences and noted that, despite living in a generally accepting environment, she still feels the weight of the government’s hate campaigns that permeate public discourse and of the exclusionary language enshrined in the Fundamental Law.
Tamás Dombos observed that the government’s measures affect certain subsets of the LGBTQ community more than others. For example, the elimination of legal gender recognition has fundamentally disrupted the lives of transgender individuals, many of whom now face mismatches between their official documents and appearance. Meanwhile, the so-called "child protection law" disproportionately affects those under 18, restricting their access to information. András Hodász warned that the wording of this law is particularly vague, creating significant legal uncertainty.
When asked what they would expect from an opposition party under the current circumstances, participants largely agreed that the role of politicians differs from that of civil society organizations.According to Dombos, politicians need to win public support—which means offering relatable touchpoints to voters and guiding them through social change, much like Barack Obama did with same-sex marriage. He added that a long-term vision is essential. Kriszta Székely stressed the need for empathy in political leaders and the importance of carefully timing both communication and actions regarding LGBTQ issues.
Meanwhile, András Hodász noted that for LGBTQ people, it is meaningful to see expressions of solidarity—such as those shown by the Mayor of Budapest. However, he argued that it is entirely unclear where the Tisza Party stands on LGBTQ matters.
Turning to the issue of societal acceptance of LGBTQ individuals, Kriszta Székely pointed out significant differences between generations and between rural areas and the capital. Tamás Dombos observed that the government’s anti-LGBTQ campaigns have resulted in heightened polarization, with an increase not only in the number of individuals rejecting LGBTQ rights outright but also in the number of those openly supporting LGBTQ rights. In his view, by pushing LGBTQ topics into the spotlight, the government has inadvertently broken long-standing taboos.
To foster greater societal acceptance of LGBTQ individuals, András Hodász advocated for genuine dialogue and a deeper understanding of the values held by opposing sides.
Tamás Dombos highlighted the transformative potential of intergenerational dialogue, while Kriszta Székely emphasized that everyone is primarily responsible for their own interactions, but that the arts and theatre also have a role to play in promoting acceptance and empathy.
At the end of the panel, all participants said they plan to attend this year’s Pride march on June 28.
The operation of Republikon Institute is supported by the European Union. The views and opinions expressed at the event do not necessarily reflect that of the European Union. Neither the European Union, nor the organisation providing support can be made responsible for these.
