Átlátszó came under attack because of their role in the “Hungarian Money” (hungarianmoney.eu) cross-border investigative journalism project led by Átlátszó Erdély based in Romania. (Átlátszó Erdély was inspired by Átlátszó, but the two organisations are independent in terms of organisation and funding).

Apart from Átlátszó (Hungary), and Átlátszó Erdély (Romania), project partners were Centar za Istraživačko Novinarstvo Srbije (Serbia), Oštro (Slovenia, Croatia) and Investigatívne Centrum Jána Kuciaka (Slovakia).

The “Hungarian Money” (hungarianmoney.eu) project was one of a series of cross-border investigative journalism projects led by the minority Hungarian-run investigative project Átlátszó Erdély based in Cluj-Napoca, Romania, a project that monitors the Hungarian state’s support of minorities abroad and its publication was in the public interest.

We condemn the smearing campaign against Átlátszó that is centered around an unchallenged investigation two years after its publication. During the preparation of the project, Bethlen Gábor Fund was asked to comment on a number of questions that were raised by project partners but the Fund never replied.

We, the undersigned partners of the investigative project, call on the involved actors to stop the smearing campaign against Átlátszó and specifically call on the Hungarian government to condemn these blatant attacks against regional independent media and the incitement of hatred towards Átlátszó and its journalists in Hungary.

Milica Šarić – Centar za Istraživačko Novinarstvo Srbije (Serbia)

Anuška Delić – Oštro (Slovenia, Croatia)

Lukáš Diko – Investigatívne Centrum Jána Kuciaka (Slovakia)

Zoltán Sipos – Átlátszó Erdély (Romania)

Tamás Bodoky – Átlátszó (Hungary)

The post We stand by Atlatszo and condemn incitement against journalists appeared first on Átlátszó Erdély.

At the end of the campaign for the Hungarian parliamentary elections, in the evening of the 31^st March several journalists in Transylvania and people close to the Hungarian opposition received pictures of a plastic bag containing some wrinkled and partially burnt ballot papers lying on an illegal dumping site near Târgu Mureș.

After checking the veracity of the information, we reported about the ballots as well. The news spread like wildfire, and that very day every political side built its own narrative on it.

According to the Hungarian opposition, the dumped ballots were evidence of systemic fraud during the voting process aboard. Fidesz and the related organisations including the DAHR and the HNCT spoke about deliberate political provocation.

The case won’t be investigated

We will never know which narrative is closer to the truth as the National Electoral Office and later the Supreme Court rejected the investigation of the case. They reasoned that the election law was applicable only on Hungarian territory.

“(…) the deed did not happen in Hungary and consequently it cannot possibly investigate the activity of unknown individuals on the territory of Romania, for lack of jurisdiction” – the reasoning read.

We have learnt from unofficial police sources that the Romanian authorities are still investigating the case. We have no information as to whether they have been contacted by the Hungarian authorities. As the disposed papers were the ballots for the Hungarian elections, the question is whether the case could be prosecuted under Romanian law.

Nevertheless, there are many other pending questions. We tried to find out who the source taking the photos was, and the deeper we dug, the more suspicious the story became. Below we have collected the most important unanswered questions that can be set out based on the little information available.

What exactly did we see?

The bag and its contents are in the possession of the Romanian authorities. We only have a few photos and a video taken on site, as well as an eyewitness’ account. Based on them, all we can put together is that there were about a dozen ballots and slightly more reply envelopes (inner and outer envelopes) in the transparent plastic bag (which an eyewitness talking to Átlátszó Erdély compared to a simple household garbage bag).

Some of the ballots were filled out (in favour of opposition parties), and the margins of the ballots were singed. According to the eyewitness, there were some inches of ash in the bag. Declarations of identification (the documents that reveal the voters’ names and contact information) could not be identified in the pictures taken of the pile of documents. It was not possible to determine from the images whether the ballots were original or not.

There is no evidence that the ballot papers and envelopes were burnt on the site. In the photos, the thin plastic garbage bag is intact, and didn’t melt. All signs show that the ballot papers were set on fire somewhere else, the ash and the partially burned ballots were placed in the plastic bag, and then the bag was disposed among the construction debris.

Are these really traces of voter fraud?

According to an obvious and virally spread explanation, these ballots are evidence of voter fraud during the postal voting process: some individuals directly interested in the victory of Fidesz deliberately destroyed the envelopes containing some votes in favour of the opposition, replacing them with envelopes containing the “right” votes.

A source of ours volunteering in the collection of mail ballots said that the mail ballots were transported by car from Târgu Mureș to the Consulate General in Miercurea Ciuc. (The road where the bag was found is on the route between Târgu Mureș and Miercurea Ciuc.) The envelopes were opened one by one, and the ballot papers replaced. In the following, we shall prove why this assumption is unrealistic.

How could it have been done? The basic condition would be that the offenders would have needed to know which envelopes contained votes for the opposition. If the envelopes (outer and inner) had not been sealed, that could have been easy to find out.

However, if they were sealed – and the majority of envelopes were probably sealed – it is not clear how the “problematic” votes could have been sorted out without opening all the envelopes. Given that Fidesz received 94% of all postal votes, every twentieth envelope could have contained votes cast in favour of the opposition. Opening all the envelopes could have been obviously much more costly (all votes would have had to be put in a new envelope) than profitable.

Let’s suppose that the ballots cast for the opposition could have somehow been identified. In this case, if the offenders had blank, unfilled ballot packages, they could have filled in the blank ballot papers, put the identification sheets from the “problematic” envelopes in the envelopes, and then sealed the envelopes and turned them in at the consulate. If this really happened, we get the explanation why there were no identification declarations found on the site.

In our opinion, electoral fraud cannot be completely ruled out, as technically it is possible. However, it is unlikely that a larger-scale electoral fraud was committed using this method.

Were the ballot papers really dumped among the debris for everyone to see?

The press reports said that the bag containing the ballot papers was found by a busy road that leads from Târgu Mureș to the neighbouring Livezeni village. This gives the impression that the ballot papers virtually lay before everyone’s eyes.

We have visited the site several times, and in our experience, this requires some qualification: the road to Livezeni is really busy, but mostly cars use it. It is possible to stop and park in front of the cemetery across the street (and probably the people who go to the cemetery stop here most often).

Although there is a narrow sidewalk, pedestrians are rare on this stretch of road. It is also important to note that there is a side road that leads to the construction debris dump, located at about 45-50 meters from the main road.

The bag in question was lying at about 2-3 meters from this side road, next to several other bags (full of construction debris). It might have been possible to notice from the road that there were documents in the bag, but this would have required a very careful examination of the site.

In light of this, it is highly difficult to imagine the scenario that a person walking around in the neighbourhood accidentally found the bag.

Who found the ballots?

As revealed above, the bag containing the ballots was placed in a busy yet outlying spot where the likelihood of unsuspecting passers-by accidentally finding it was very small.

It’s also important to note that the ballots could have been easily destroyed, so that no one would ever find them. For instance, the ballots could have been totally burnt.

Against this background, we assume that the aim was precisely to have someone discover the bag. Moreover, the one discovering the ballots was either an eyewitness on the spot where the bag was dumped or he threw the bag on the debris pile himself.

Whoever discovered it knew what he was doing. The contact details of the journalists and editorial offices in Mureș County are not confidential, however this kind of information is not readily available to anyone, as a certain kind of skilfulness in public affairs is required to acquire them.

The source sent the first photos to several journalists around Mureș County on the 30^th March at 20:46 by WhatsApp. Two minutes later, a journalist working with the local TV channel (who asked us not to mention his name, as she didn’t deal with public affairs stories) forwarded this very first WhatsApp message to the Grup Presa IPJ Ms group. This group has 97 members: journalists and the representatives of Mureș County Police Headquarters.

The WhatsApp number that the first message had initially been sent from was alive at the beginning. Cristian Teodorescu, the first journalist who arrived on site and to whom the source sent the pictures directly revealed that he had exchanged messages with the source at the beginning for around 10-15 minutes while he had been looking for the bag on the site. The last exchange of messages took place at 21:17, then the source could no longer be reached – Teodorescu said.

We also called the number in vain; we got the message that the number is no longer in use / the number cannot be reached. We also searched for the number in various databases, to no effect.

When taking the photos, the source also took care that journalists looking for the bag would not be groping in the dark. The cemetery is clearly visible in the first photo, so the exact location can be easily found by someone who more or less knows the area, and can also be identified very quickly on Google Maps.

The source was cautious as he sent the photos to the press by WhatsApp. This app automatically removes the metadata from the photos, which might have taken us one step closer to solving the mystery.

Who scattered the ballots around from the bag?

It can be seen that the photos attached to the first message were taken in sunlight. As on the 30^th March the sun set at 19:53, we assume that the photos had not been taken right before being sent but at least an hour before or even earlier. It’s also striking that most of the ballot papers were in the bag, perhaps with two ballot papers or envelopes lying next to the bag.

To our knowledge, Cristian Teodorescu, the punctul.ro journalist was the first who got on site; he reported that this footage was recorded at 22:30. The recording clearly shows that the ballots were no longer in the bag here, but scattered around on the ground.

Teodorescu declared to Átlátszó Erdély that he had gone on site together with a close friend whom he had taken along to witness that he had not touched the bag. There was no one else on the site but them; they also left after 10-15 minutes. “I also realised later on that the first photos and the de facto situation (i.e. the scattered ballots) were different.” – he told us. For that matter, punctul.ro published the first report on it the following morning at 4:00, sharing it on Facebook at 7:00 AM.

How did the Hungarian opposition learn about the dumped ballots?

About half an hour after the photos got to the journalists of Mureș County, at 21:20 we also received photos of the bag lying on the dump from a source close to the Hungarian opposition. As far as we could tell, these were the same photos that had also been sent to punctul.ro: the direction of the lights as well as the position of the photographer and the bag were the same.

Tamás Bodoky, the editor-in-chief of atlatszo.hu, also received the photos from a Hungarian opposition background source shortly after, at 21:48. The photos might also have been sent to others.

The Hungarian opposition learning about the photos so quickly is interesting because, to our knowledge, the journalists of Mureș County, mostly of Romanian nationality, do not have a lot of connections among the Hungarian opposition parties and politicians.

How did Boróka Parászka get in the picture and how did the affair become a “leftist provocation”?

The Târgu Mureș Radio staff member and well-known publicist, went on site the next morning after learning about what had happened in the press (she claimed she hadn’t received the WhatsApp message). Parászka does not live far from the site (her house is 1.5 km as the crow flies from the cemetery, 2 km on the road). The publicist reported that the police had already been there when she arrived, and the investigators spoke Hungarian. Everyone was ID’ed but the reporter was not allowed close to the bag.

A photo of Boróka Parászka was taken on the spot, which greatly contributed to the strengthening of the left-wing provocation narrative according to which Boróka Parászka might have had something to do with the burned ballot papers.

The photo was first published on the Facebook page of László Szőke, the development director and public commentator of the Szeklerland press trust, financed by the Hungarian government. The picture had been taken from a more remote location, from a nearby field.

We contacted László Szőke, and he merely told us that the photo had been taken by a “local force”. We were unable to track down this photographer; we have no information about other photos of this event having been published.

Another recurring element of the “leftist provocation” narrative is that Transtelex “pre-wrote” this material, as there was a technical error in dating it when it was taken over to Telex’s editorial system, as the date had jumped back to a random day. According to the Transtelex official statement, the article could not possibly have been “prefabricated” on the 1^st February as the order of the parties on the ballot papers was drawn on the 26^th February, and the layout of the ballot papers was approved by the electoral committee on the 4^th March.

Translation: Auguszta Szász

This article is part of our project aiming to monitor the 2022 parliamentary elections in Hungary. The project was funded in part by a grant from Investigative Journalism Europe (IJ4EU) and a grant from the United States Department of State. The opinions, findings and conclusions stated herein are those of the author[s] and do not necessarily reflect those of the funders.

The post All we know and assume about the dumped mail ballots appeared first on Átlátszó Erdély.

After several months of tuning, the DAHR and the HNCT have switched to full campaign mode this week. Looking at the Facebook activities of the politicians of the two organizations, we have the feeling that these Transylvanian officials are fighting for their own mandates in a “sharp” election campaign – although only the ballots are being collected for the Hungarian parliamentary elections.

The collected ballots will be sent either to the consulates in Cluj-Napoca and Miercurea Ciuc or to a constituency in Hungary. However, it is hard to double-check: envelopes are received in most cases completely informally, voters rarely receive an acknowledgment of receipt, and there is usually no confirmation that their vote has been cast in the ballot box.

Assistance is not illegal – however, it’s unclear what it covers

This “assistance” is allowed by the Hungarian electoral law. However, it does not specify what is included in the assistance and to what extent it infringes the secrecy of vote.

As the role of the DAHR and the HNCT is not transparent, it raises suspicions of electoral abuse. How can you see a fair, impartial mediator in the organisations funded by the current Hungarian government, which have been campaigning for Fidesz in recent months, and whose leaders are not hiding their political options for a single minute?

It is important to emphasize that we currently have no evidence of electoral fraud, either in the Eurotrans Foundation offices or in the network of Democracy Centres. The suspicious cases that have come to our attention during the vote so far are not necessarily linked to any of the organisations, and rather appear as isolated incidents of overzealousness.

At the same time, in addition to the DAHR and the HNCT, several other organisations, even individuals, collect mail ballots. It is not uncommon in some villages for envelopes to be submitted at the parish or brought to the consulate by a neighbour. In Háromszék, for instance, the Bertis shop chain has gotten involved in collecting: the mail ballots can be left at the cash desk.

Some dozens of ballots were received by the Democracy Centres

The only change since the parliamentary elections four years ago is that less voters ask for mail packages to be sent to the Eurotrans and the Democracy Centres.

“This year, a few dozen more arrived at our offices upon the voters’ request, and most of them were sent out. Of course, they also gave us contact information so we could let them know. Currently, a total of two such ballot packages are still waiting for their owners in our offices.” – answered Krisztina Sándor, executive official of the HNCT to our question. Eurotrans only responded that no packages were sent to their addresses.

The consulates communicate particularly little

While everyone in Transylvania is collecting mail ballots zealously and voters are often specifically asked not to take the envelopes to the consulates, the consulates in Cluj-Napoca and Miercurea Ciuc communicate particularly little on Facebook. At the time of our article, there are 1-2 paid campaigns running with elections information.

Information that mail ballots may be cast in person at consulates is displayed on the Facebook pages, but not prominently. You need to carefully scroll down and read the posts to find it. This is strange because the safest way to vote is to take votes in person to the ballot boxes at the consulates.

The Consulate General of Miercurea Ciuc has spent about 14,400 lei (2,900 EUR) on Facebook ads since the end of December last year. Election-related ads only started running in February. The Consulate General in Cluj-Napoca advertised for nearly 11,800 lei (2,385 EUR) in the same period, and advertising campaigns also started in February.

The press department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade responded briefly to our questions sent to the consulates. That’s all we’ve learned about Facebook communication:

“Our delegations draw the attention of the electorate to all the possibilities at hand that they have, so that their mails arrive at the National Electoral Office on time thanks the information published on the available platforms and by sharing it.”

Now, it’s the Transylvanian Hungarians’ turn to say thanks

Unlike the Consulates General, the two organisations facilitating the simplified naturalisation – the Eurotrans Foundation closely related to the DAHR and the network of Democracy Centres (Demokrácia Központok) operated by the HNCT – have been campaigning since last autumn. Initially, the Transylvanian Hungarians were encouraged to register and update their data, then after the registration deadline, i.e. 9 March 2022 and the arrival of the envelopes, they started collecting mail ballots.

In its advertisements, the Eurotrans Foundation does not even try to give the impression that it is facilitating the elections as an independent organization. The vast majority of ads suggest that it is in the best interest of the Transylvanian Hungarians that the current government continue its work. Several campaign materials mention the subsidies from Hungary, noting that it is now the Transylvanian Hungarians’ turn to help the Hungarian government.

While Foreign Minister, Péter Szijjártó and other members of the Hungarian government appear in the advertisements several times, the opposition appears only in a negative context, if ever.

In the last three months, the Eurotrans Foundation has published 247 advertisements worth a total of 23,700 lei (4,770 EUR). About half of this amount, 10,700 lei (2160 EUR), has been spent on 119 ads in the last 30 days. However, the total cost of the campaign was certainly much more than that: making films and other creative materials could not be cheap either.

The Democracy Centres’ campaigns are modest compared to Eurotrans

The presence of the DAHR’s opposition, the Democracy Centres operated by the Hungarian National Council in Transylvania, on Facebook is much more modest. They have spent 3,650 lei (740 euros) on advertising in the last three months, including their campaign to help refugees in Ukraine and several smaller projects.

The Democracy Centers clearly have less resources than Eurotrans. While the latter organisation advertises with short films of impeccable quality, the motion pictures of the Democracy Centres were taken over from the news, most of their advertising materials are simple graphics, and members of the Hungarian government do not appear here either.

Even though online presence is important, mail ballots are not collected on Facebook. Most of the work is done by staff of the Eurotrans Foundation and the Democracy Centres in the regional offices of the two organizations. If we take a closer look at these offices, we can see why the Eurotrans Foundation and the DAHR appear in many advertisements as one and the same entity.

In the very same office with the parties

Although the DAHR and the Eurotrans Foundation are two distinct legal persons, they cover essentially the same organisation. The Eurotrans Foundation was established by the DAHR, its chairman being Zoltán Nagy, the chief of staff is Kelemen Hunor, President of the DAHR. The Eurotrans office network largely coincides with the addresses of the DAHR’s local offices.

In other words, the local employees of Eurotrans and the DAHR work in one and the same office and premises all over Transylvania. The question is how civic and political activity can be separated during a campaign. The situation is similar with the network of Democracy Centres operated by the Hungarian National Council in Transylvania: these offices are at the same time the headquarters of the regional organisations of the Hungarian People’s Party in Transylvania.

The extent to which these organisations converge is well illustrated by the mass text that Átlátszó Erdély laid hands on sent out on 28 March by a Cluj County DAHR politician. In this, he urges colleagues to “take the task seriously”, as only 40% of the votes that had been collected four years ago was collected. “Don’t give it to the minister, don’t take it to the consulate! They must get to the county DAHR!” – read the message.

A day later, on 29 March, another text was sent, this time praising them: “Thanks for your work! As of today, we’ve reached 60 percent. (…) On the last day, our task is to get all votes of the county. (…) Let’s go for it!”

The text message is real, but there is no quota to be reached

Upon our question, Géza Antal, executive president of the Cluj County DAHR confirmed that they had indeed sent such texts to the elected officials and the internal management staff.

We also asked whether there was a quota that the county DAHR needs to achieve in terms of the number of mail ballots to be collected. According to Antal, there is no quota that anyone would have set for the Cluj County organisation of the DAHR.

The competition is not just seen in mobilization. The DAHR and HNCT often pose with envelopes collected by their staff or when they throw in the ballots at consulates.

There is no quota but there are targets

We asked the Eurotrans and the HNCT about the quotas. The Eurotrans’ answer: ‘There is no target number. In 2018, we helped nearly 100,000 people get their mail ballots back and compiled the letter package. Without exception, these letter packages were successfully delivered to the Consulates General or to the Hungarian constituencies along the border. People need this help; this number is expected to be even higher this year.’

“There is no such target number set by an external party, it is not possible to standardize this work, because there are many possibilities to return the ballots. We use targets to organise our own work because it is more efficient, but they only help and impact on the internal processes.” – said the HNCT.

The two office networks operate thanks to HUF 250-400 million grants every year

Both the Eurotrans Foundation and the Democracy Centres operate with the support of the Hungarian government, more precisely the Prime Minister’s Office. We requested their contracts and settlements with data requests. The Prime Minister’s Office partially complied with our request: it did not send the documents but gave us the opportunity to flip through them and take notes.

Since 2017, the Eurotrans Foundation has received subsidies between 250 million – 400 million HUF (680 thousand to 1 million EUR) annually from the Prime Minister’s Office and the Gábor Bethlen Fund. The foundation had 71 employees in 2020, spending most of the subsidies for wages. In 2020, for example, they forecast to spend 212 million HUF (578,000 EUR) for this purpose, and 120 million HUF (320,000 EUR) was set aside in their budgets for material expenses.

The HNCT Association receives roughly similar amounts as subsidies: since 2017, the subsidies received from the Prime Minister’s Office have ranged between 250 to 400 million HUF (680 thousand to 1 million EUR). It is important to note that both organizations have been assisting in the compilation of naturalisation applications since the beginning of the simplified naturalisation process (2012). According to the last published balance sheet, the HNCT Association had 53 staff. Their financial plans show that wages accounted for the largest share of the costs: in 2020, 179 million HUF (486,000 EUR) was earmarked for this purpose, and material expenses amounted to 62 million HUF (168,000 EUR).

The ballots are mainly collected on trust

It is not clear whether those who leave the packages with the mail in ballots at the Eurotrans offices, or the Democracy Centres will receive an acknowledgment of receipt. How will they be notified that their packages have been sent or delivered to a consulate or the National Electoral Office?

“If they ask for an acknowledgment of receipt, they will of course receive it. But it is unusual because people trust the Foundation and its staff, and those who give us the ballot packages are confident that we will deliver them to the Consulates General on time. If the voters provides their phone number when handing over the package, we will notify them about the delivery via a text message.” – the communication office of the Eurotrans Foundation responded to our request.

Krisztina Sándor wrote to our question about the acknowledgments the following: “They will not receive any acknowledgment or confirmation that their vote has been sent to any consulate. Just as the post office does not provide it to those who put their vote in the mailbox.”

How is the secrecy of the ballot ensured?

What exactly are the instructions given to their co-workers who collect the mail ballots? In a situation where an elderly voter asks the staff for help in filling out the forms, how is the confidentiality of the ballot ensured? – we asked from the Eurotrans Foundation and the HNCT.

“Our staff will only assist in compiling the mail package and filling in the identification statement. We ask people to fill out the ballot themselves at home. We receive the mail ballot package with the sealed inner envelope containing the ballot.” – said the Eurotrans Fundation.

“Our staff can only help and help those who come to us to fill in the identification statement and put it in the envelopes. If there is a voter who has not yet filled out his ballot or “referendum” slip, we ask him to step aside in a separate room or corner set up for this purpose and effectively vote.

At the same time, the vast majority of voters only come to us to return of their mail ballots, so they come to us with the closed mail ballot packages. We also help many with methodological guidance: what goes into the smaller and what goes into the bigger envelope, because there had been lots of invalid ballots in previous years.” – answered Krisztina Sándor.

Don’t take it to the consulate general not even if its 180 m away from the Eurotrans office

It is striking that the official communication emphasizes everywhere that the envelopes should be taken to the Eurotrans Foundation as well as the Democracy Centres. There is little information about the voters being able to take the envelopes directly to the consulate in Cluj-Napoca and Miercurea Ciuc.

In Cluj-Napoca, for example, the Eurotrans Foundation office is located at 2 Iuliu Maniu Street, exactly 180 meters from the Consulate General. And even so, the Eurotrans Foundation asks everyone to bring the ballots to them, not to the Consulate General.

Personal delivery is important because the more hands a ballot passes through, from the voter to the National Electoral Office, the greater the theoretical chance of fraud.

“(…) In the online communication of the Eurotrans Foundation, the priority is to help those who are unsure to fill in the identification statement correctly and compile the ballot package, and we shall take the votes to the delegations by the specified deadline. Except for the residents of Miercurea Ciuc and Cluj-Napoca, it is less realistic for someone to travel hundreds of kilometres to cast their ballot in person. That is why they can contact our colleagues from Satu Mare, through Târgu Mureş to Hunedoara.” – answered the Eurotrans Foundation to our question.

“The vast majority of our clients do not turn to us in Cluj-Napoca or in Miercurea Ciuc, so personal delivery at consulates is not a realistic option for them. Therefore, we also use our limited advertising opportunities to inform that precise majority. We do not specifically recommend our Transylvanian voters to return their ballots by mail, mainly because the ballots must be received at the National Electoral Office in Budapest by the day of the elections. (…) We see delivery to consulates as a much safer method as we have mentioned it in several places, and we take the collected ballots from all our offices there ourselves.” – said Sándor Krisztina.

Translation: Auguszta Szász

Cover photo: an employee of the DAHR delivers ballots to the Consulate General in Cluj. Source: the Facebook page of the Cluj county DAHR

This article is part of our project aiming to monitor the 2022 parliamentary elections in Hungary. The project was funded in part by a grant from Investigative Journalism Europe (IJ4EU) and a grant from the United States Department of State. The opinions, findings and conclusions stated herein are those of the author[s] and do not necessarily reflect those of the funders.

The post From the DAHR to the grocer’s: everyone’s zealously collecting the mail ballots in Transylvania appeared first on Átlátszó Erdély.

Tavaly is elárasztották Erdélyt a magyarországi közpénzek. Mutatjuk a legnagyobb nyerteseket

Átlátszó Erdély Kövess minket vagy írj nekünk! A 2017-es rekordot túlszárnyalva 47 milliárd forintot ítélt meg erdélyi szervezetek számára 2018-ban a Bethlen Gábor Alap. A Sapientia-EMTE, az Iskola Alapítvány, az egyházak és a fociklubok kaptak milliárdos nagyságrendű támogatásokat. A 2017-es 46,6 milliárdnál (146 millió euró) valamivel többet, 47 milliárd forintot ítélt meg tavaly a Bethlen Gábor Alap erdélyi szervezeteknek.

Without an official aggregate, we can only have an educated guess

Because the Hungarian government does not have a public, easily searchable database containing every grant and sponsorship awarded to organizations abroad, we gathered some of the data ourselves. Because our data is likely not to be complete, we can only make an educated guess of the financial support received by these organizations.
In 2018, the most consistent financial support totaling 13,7 billion forints (43 million EUR) went to the Sapientia Hungarian University of Transylvania (Sapientia-EMTE). The university will spend most of this money on development of its campuses, as well as equipment.
The Hungarian Teacher’s Association of Romania (Romániai Magyar Pedagógus Szövetség) won a number of grants totaling 5 billion forints (15 million EUR). Its most important program aims the development of kindergartens: the organization received a total of 4,2 million forints for this purpose. About 500 million forints will be spent on real estate development and equipment.
The School Foundation (Iskola Alapítvány) founded by the Democratic Alliance of Hungarians from Romania (RMDSZ) received grants totaling 2,4 billion forints (7,5 million EUR) for buying real estate in Nagyvárad (Oradea) and Kolozsvár (Cluj-Napoca). The buildings will be transformed into multifunctional cultural centers. The total cost of the program is about 4 billion forints.
The Roman Catholic Diocese of Oradea Mare was awarded 2,3 billion forints (7,2 million EUR) for the renovation works of the Episcopal palace in Oradea.

The Futball Klub Csíkszereda football academy received 2,1 billion forints (6,6 million EUR) for the functioning costs and development of the academy. The Sepsi OSK football team was awarded another 2,1 billion forints – our investigation into the football projects financed with Hungarian public funds can be accessed here.
The Királyhágómellék Reformed Church District received 2,1 billion forints: out of this grant, 1,7 billion will be spent on a kindergarten program. The Reformed Church District in Transylvania was awarded grants in amount of 1,8 billion forints; 1 billion will be spent on kindergartens.
The The Roman Catholic Diocese of Satu Mare received 1,7 billion forints, most of this grant will be invested in the development of the diocese. The Studium Prospero Foundation received 1,4 billion forints to continue its program of building housing for doctors.

The post The Hungarian community in Transylvania, flooded with financial support from Hungary. These are the biggest winners appeared first on Átlátszó Erdély.

Those who are familiar with the situation in the media are not surprised by the fact that the Hungarian media in Transylvania is facing severe lack of funding and is trying to stay afloat by using funds coming from Hungary.
But by 2016 there was a perceptible change in the funding policy: while before the Fidesz government was supporting the so-called „right-leaning” media platforms, today, irrespective of the views held, significant financial support is granted to the four most important portals- székelyhon.ro, maszol.ro, Transindex.ro and Főtér.ro – coming directly from the Hungarian Prime Minister’s Office, from the public lottery, Szerencsejáték Zrt. and also from the state owned electricity company, MVM Zrt. The question is whether this support comes with a price, and if it does, how and when will it have to be repaid.

The original article in Hungarian:

Magához édesgette a Fidesz az erdélyi magyar online sajtót

The shift is significant. Even though in the past twenty five years the Hungarian media outlets in Transylvania were constantly receiving funding as part of the financial support framework targeting the Hungarian community in Transylvania, the beneficiaries changed according to which government, right-wing or left-wing was on power.

Megainvestments using Hungarian public money

A not too oversized financial support was every now and then granted to different media outlets. Péter Medgyessy made a hasty decision regarding funding which lead to creating the Transylvanian Hungarian Television (Erdélyi Magyar Televízió, ETV). After the change of government the most outstanding media investment also used Hungarian public money: since 2011 the majority owner of the biggest Hungarian media company in Transylvania, the Udvarhelyi Híradó SRL, is Foundation for Hungarian Media Without Borders (Határok Nélkül a Magyar Sajtóért Alapítvány). This foundation grants financial support to four local newspapers, regional dailies and weeklies, among them also the leading portal, székelyhon.ro.
The foundation is financing the media outlets with several million euros, its income being donations coming from state owned Hungarian companies. Besides the Udvarhelyi Híradó media outlet group, the foundation is also supporting Főtér.ro, a smaller portal publishing mainly op-eds.

From Simicska to the Propaganda Ministry

At the beginning the foundation used to be part of the sphere of influence of Lajos Simicska. But in 2015, in the aftermath of the Orbán-Simicska conflict, the businessman handed over the foundation together with all the Transylvanian and Southern Slovakian media outlets it used to provide financial support for.
Since then, according to their 2016 public financial report, the foundation received 150 million HUF (448,000 EUR), meaning 3/4th of its overall budget from the Prime Minister’s Office, which is called the „Propaganda Ministry” by Hungarian independent media. The Hungarian Development Bank (Magyar Fejlesztési Bank Zrt.) donated 50 million HUF (162,000 EUR).

They are also open towards the „left”

It still strikes as new, but it is probably due to the agreement between the Democratic Union of Hungarians in Romania (DAHR) and Fidesz that the financial support policy has overcome the right-left dichotomy („left” and „right” are being used here for the sake of simplicity, they do not necessarily refer to political ideologies of the outlets): today, the two big DAHR- controlled and traditionally „left leaning” portals, maszol.ro and Transindex.ro are both partly financed by Hungarian public money.
For a long time, the „leftwing” media outlets did not receive any support from the Fidesz governments. In 2015 though the ice broke when Progress Foundation, which publishes the news portal maszol.ro received 2 million HUF (6,400 EUR) from Szerencsejáték Zrt. In the same year the Pallas Athéné Domus Concordiae Foundation (PADOC), created by the the Hungarian National Bank with the purpose of distributing financial support to Hungarian institutions outside of Hungary, granted 600 thousand HUF (1,900 EUR) to the Média Index Association which the publisher of Transindex.ro.
The smaller amounts were followed by more significant ones in 2016: maszol.ro (Progress Foundation) received 20 million HUF (64,000 EUR) from Szerencsejáték Zrt., Transindex.ro (Média Index Association) received 10-10 million HUF (a total of 20 million HUF, 64,000 EUR) from MVM, the Magyar Villamos Művek Zrt. and Szerencsejáték Zrt.

Why is this a problem?

This is a problem because nor the Prime Minister’s Office, nor PADOC, nor the MVM Zrt. or the Szerencsejáték Zrt. qualify as professional media investors. They have no interest in supporting transparency, free debate, and a professional Hungarian press in Transylvania. Instead, they serve and represent the interests of the Hungarian government and as such, discretely finance certain projects important for the Hungarian government.
By accident it has been revealed that the list of beneficiaries is not decided upon by the MVM Zrt. independently, but by the National Communications Authority. And this is probably also the case for Szerencsejáték Zrt.
Besides, the last time when we heard in Transylvania about the MVM Zrt. and Szerencsejáték Zrt. was when the two state owned companies granted financial support for a series of civil organizations related to the Hungarian People’s Party. This is why it is hard to believe that there are no terms and conditions written in the barely readable small print section.

Do those couple of millions really matter?

Compared to the huge amounts of money poured in government media the amounts granted to the Hungarian media in Transylvania is indeed not significant. But we should also keep in mind that apart from Udvarhelyi Híradó, we are talking about small news websites where maybe a dozen of journalists are working. For them, even 10,000 EUR is a significant amount, as their jobs might be depending on it.
In 2016, according to its annual financial report, the Erdélyi Médiatér Egyesület (Asociatia pentru Spatiul Media Transilvan/The Association for Transylvanian Media Space) which is the publisher of Főtér.ro had an yearly income of 633,000 RON (138 thousand euros). This amount equals approximately 43 million HUF, which is the amount received from the Foundation Határok Nélkül a Magyar Sajtóért (Foundation for Hungarian Media Without Borders) as well. The existence of the opinion portal Főtér.ro depends completely on such support.
Főtér is not enlisted on the Romanian audit page, Trafic.ro, thus we lack data on their traffic, but we assume that their traffic is not bigger than that of local portals such as uh.ro, szatmar.ro or erdon.ro. In our article we placed them on the fourth position given that they address regional rather than local issues, and as a consequence, in our view, their traffic is similar to that of „bigger” portals.
According to our calculations, in 2016 the total income of the Media Index Association, the publisher of Transindex.ro was totalling 497,000 RON (108,000 EUR). 60% of its income, namely 20 million HUF (64,000 EUR) came from the MVM Zrt. and from Szerencsejáték Zrt. Truth be told, the situation is a bit more complicated than that, as besides the association which is the publisher of the portal, there is another media company behing Transindex.ro, the Media Net SRL, which last year had an income of 208,000 RON (45,000 EUR).
Even though for Progress Foundation, the publisher of maszol.ro the main source of income is still government funding coming from Bucharest via DAHR, in 2016, one quarter/one third of the foundation’s total income, namely of 20 million forints, was made up of also 981,000 RON (214,000 EUR) coming from Szerencsejáték Zrt.
We lack data on the 2016 income of Udvarhelyi Híradó SRL as the yearly financial report has not yet been uploaded to the website of the Ministry of Finances. But according to data from 2015 one third of its its yearly income of 17,3 million RON (3,8 million EUR) came from Határok Nélkül a Magyar Sajtóért Alapítvány (Foundation for Hungarian Media Without Borders) which granted a financial support of 392 million HUF (1,3 million EUR).

Easy money leads to vulnerability

This is how the most important three to four Transylvanian Hungarian online media outlets – to a bigger or smaller extent – are financed by Hungarian public money.
This is „easy money” because, according to our informations it is sufficient to hand in a one or two page application. This also means that the applicants don’t have to invest any energy in marketing, in commercial sales, in writing applications, overall less energy and money is invested in operating a media outlet as business.
But this creates advantages only on the short run: on medium and on the long run the business knowledge and the professional networks weakens, and the media company becomes increasingly vulnerable. In consequence, if above mentioned financial support terminates, some portals might be facing a difficult economic situation.
But you should also spot the irony here: these portals are rivals, in January 2017, maszol.ro and transindex.ro had a public skirmish regarding their audience numbers.

There is censorship, but there is no propaganda. For now

By today it is clear that (self-)censorship in the Hungarian media in Transylvania is an everyday practice, and if a journalist or editor deals with a politically sensitive issue, it will have consequences. But up to now the anti-refugee propaganda was not prevalent, publishing defamatory articles about György Soros and committing character assasination is not common practice either.
But it is still not known whether this will change with the upcoming parliamentary elections taking place in Hungary. What we do know though is that in the recent past a Ministerial Commissioner has been appointed and has the task of convincing more and more Hungarian citizens living outside the border of Hungary to vote.

„We are not forbidding anything, at worst, we debate”

„(…) we are not misleading our readers, nor our colleagues: we stand by the values we represent, there is no unbridgeable contrast between the owner (the Foundation) and what we believe in. Preventing anything, especially the influence of Hungarian politics is not something we should be doing” – said László Szőke, the managing director of the Foundation owning the Udvarhelyi Híradó SRL when answering the questions of Átlátszó Erdély related to preventive strategies regarding the political influence of the Hungarian Government on the published content.
According to Szőke „speaking in general about the influence of Hungarian politics is too broad and vague and means nothing. At most, certain issues, topics, messages might be filtered by the content director and editor in chief: but a material gets published following a professional debate ending in consensus, but which cannot go against the editor’s will.
Self-censorship is present to the same extent as it is present in the case of Átlátszó or Index: at our group of portals there is agreement in terms of accepting the values that are determined by our minority status and to which our colleagues also adapt to (otherwise, they wouldn’t have joined us!) and yes, how Hungary relates to us, Transylvanian Hungarians is also part of it. How the political situation in Hungary affects us will be of course dealt with on our portals, because that makes total sense. We are not standing in the way of anything, at most, we are debating. And we do not agree that a portal should have an editor-in-chief who is too obeying.”

„Our supporters have no influence on us whatsoever”

The editor-in-chief of Főtér.ro, Attila Zsolt Papp told us: „I would like to make an apparently small, but important distinction right at the beginning: the Foundation Határok Nélkül a Magyar Sajtóért (Foundation for Hungarian Media Without Borders) is not the owner of the Erdélyi Médiatér Association (Transylvanian Media Space Association) which is the publisher of Főtér, but it is its financial supporter: this means that it is not the Foundation which created a platform, but a Transylvanian Hungarian mediaproject seeked and found financial support which was granted by the Foundation. We are not receiving financial support automatically, but based on an application that we hand in every year; also, we are not part of any mediaportfolio related to the Foundation.
This practically means that our supporters have no influence on our editorial principles: it is the editors who decide on the content that is to be published and this is quite visible when browsing through our archive. In the past three years I have not sensed any kind of political pressure or attempt to interfere with our materials (Just as a reminder: during the 2014 Parliamentary elections Főtér has already been running for four months and for now there are no signs that this would change in the future. Besides, this is also my personal undertaking: as editor-in-chief I am not willing to accept any interfering in the work of the portal and its content- and this will not change.”
We also addressed our questions to the president of the executive board of Progress Foundation, the publisher of maszol.ro, Nagy-Debreczeni Hajnalka, but she did not give us a meaningful answer. Transindex did not react to our inquiry.
Sipos Zoltán
The author of this article used to work at Transindex until November, 2015.

Translation: Etelka Tamás-Blaha

The post Fidesz has won over the Hungarian online press in Transylvania appeared first on Átlátszó Erdély.