In early 2024, Hungary’s Protection of National Sovereignty Act set up a so-called Sovereignty Protection Office (SPO). Ostensibly aimed at countering foreign influence on Hungarian elections, the SPO is an arbitrarily appointed body operating without any oversight – as pointed out in a joint statement by independent Hungarian media outlets. The SPO’s activities so far have a particular – and hostile – focus on independent news media.
The Office launched an investigation into the operations of Transparency International Hungary, and anti-corruption investigative media outlet Átlátszó.hu. Reports on these investigations were published in October and contain unfounded allegations that misrepresent the role of journalism. The main claim is that Átlátszó.hu is part of a “foreign influence network” that serves as a “highly effective weapon of US economic and political interests”. The report describes Átlátszó’s public information requests and its WikiLeaks platform as “an opportunity to mask intelligence activities against the Hungarian state and its institutions, disguised as legitimate data gathering. (…) [Which] in itself is a violation of the sovereignty of the nation state.” Investigative journalism, according to the report, is merely a cover for intelligence gathering. Among the organizations “ousted” as part of this “international web of foreign influence” are private and public institutions, including The National Endowment for Democracy, the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, VSquare, Open Society Foundations, and Fritt Ord Foundation.
The report concludes “the inquiry and the report were carried out without the cooperation of Átlátszó. The result of the inquiry explains the resistance of the organisation, as the activities revealed clearly pose a sovereignty protection problem for Hungary. The extent of the damage caused by Átlátszó’s activities is considerable.”
The SPO currently lacks sanctioning power; however, the significance of the report should not be underestimated. It further discredits organizations, undermining the essential role that these entities and journalists play in the public sphere. The report contributes to the erosion of trust in independent journalism and the information it provides by framing investigative reporting as espionage on behalf of foreign interests, public information requests as cover for intelligence activities, and international collaborations as networking with enemies of the state. Additionally, labeling funding from private donors and international organizations as being part of a “foreign influence acquisition network” further stigmatizes and discredits the work of journalists.
The report strengthens the government’s narrative that the media is a political actor with its own political motivations and ties, and therefore should be treated as such. The outlandish claims of the report create the potential to deter donors, pave the way for legal investigations, strain the already limited resources of these organizations, and exacerbate the chilling effect on independent journalism.