In 2023, the Hungarian government passed the Defense of National Sovereignty Act, a law that grants the newly established Sovereignty Protection Office the authority to investigate individuals or organizations allegedly acting under foreign influence. Introduced by Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party, the legislation was a response to opposition parties that received international funding. The Fidesz government claims that this external pressure directly threatens Hungary’s national sovereignty. However, the law’s implications extend beyond political campaigns. Independent media outlets that receive foreign support or are suspected of promoting foreign interests are also at risk of investigation. These pluralistic media sources are accused of undermining the Hungarian state, but in doing so, they expose the Fidesz party’s tightening control and increasingly authoritarian practices. Targeting these outlets suggests that the Act is not aimed at protecting national sovereignty. Instead, it reflects the use of institutions to suppress media and weaken mechanisms of democratic accountability, legitimizing authoritarian practices in Hungary.

Hungary’s democratic backsliding has been ongoing for over a decade, allowing for Orbán and Fidesz to systematically erode institutional checks and balances. Orbán has weakened judicial independence, minimized opposition parties, and is now actively working to reduce freedom of the press. These shifts are not just flaws in Hungary’s political system, they are the result of intentional decisions made by political leaders. As Waldner and Lust explain, democratic backsliding often occurs when political actors strategically weaken institutions to strengthen their power (Waldner & Lust). The decline of democratic norms is intentional. The Fidesz party has used policies and elections to dismantle democracy from within. The Defense National Sovereignty Act reflects this logic. The law appears to be legal and working in Hungary’s best interest, while it is actually undermining the democratic principles it claims to defend.

Although Orbán frames the Defense of National Sovereignty Act as a national security mechanism, it has repetitively proven to be a political manipulation tactic. The Sovereignty Protection Office’s unchecked investigatory powers raise concerns over its true intentions. Its ability to target opposition parties and politicians compromises the legitimacy of competition in elections. The new regulations condemn foreign funding, suggesting it undermines national sovereignty. However, instead of protecting Hungary, these strategies limit opposition funding, curtailing their ability to push back against the Fidez party in elections, ultimately creating unfair practices. In 2022, opposition parties who received foreign donations for their campaigns received a legally sanctioned fine from the State Audit Office. Allowing Orbàn’s government to penalize opposition with no oversight under these new laws directly weakens pluralism and encourages single party dominance in Hungary. Legalizing infringements of power for personal gain erodes the checks and balances essential to democracy, preventing opposition parties from pushing back on authoritarian practices.

A crucial aspect of Fidesz’s strategy is the control of information. The media has become a tool of political influence, helping the government advance friendly narratives. Fidesz has gradually gained control over a substantial portion of Hungary’s media, allowing them to frame their intentions in a way that is appealing to the public. This media dominance allows Fidesz to gain support, presenting itself as a defender of national sovereignty, while discrediting dissenting voices. While the Defense of National Sovereignty Act amplifies this control by legalizing unchecked investigations on independent media outlets and limiting the information accessible to the public, Fidez allies have also manipulated media directly. Híradó, a Hungarian broadcast network, launched a “Fake News Observer” that claims to identify disinformation. This effort is not an independent fact-checking body. Instead, it is controlled by Fidez’s allies and functions as a government filter of news stories. The government can easily manipulate coverage, preventing citizens from gaining access to unfavorable stories and diverse perspectives. This fact-checking agency is a powerful tactic for Fidesz allies to offer counter narratives to any news opposing the government. Despite these efforts, some individuals look beyond Híradó’s platform, allowing independent media to continue challenging Orban’s public image and revealing his anti-democratic intentions. Simultaneously targeting independent media outlets through the Sovereignty Protection Office further limits opposition and disconnects the people from their government, reinforcing anti-democratic practices.

The Sovereignty Protection Office operates without independent oversight, granting it unchecked authority to investigate entities suspected of acting under foreign influence. In 2024, Átlátszó, an investigative media outlet, and Transparency International Hungary, an NGO, were under investigation after they were accused of using foreign support to influence voters. The office sent several questions to both organizations, aiming to intimidate journalists and signal that dissenting coverage will be met with government retaliation. Independent media is crucial to democracy as it allows for transparency between a government and its citizens. When journalists are able to report freely, the public can hold leaders accountable through elections or protests if they are not acting in the national interest. However, if news reports are suppressed, citizens are denied the information they need to make informed decisions, therefore limiting vertical accountability. If the media is dominated by one manipulated narrative, the public is more likely to accept government messaging without being critical of its true intentions. Harmful policies can be framed as beneficial, while wrongdoings are buried and opposition voices are discredited. In this case, the media can no longer act as a watchdog and instead fuels authoritarian consolidation, making democratic backsliding more difficult to reverse.

The Defense of National Sovereignty Act demonstrates how Orbán’s government masks its intentions with pro-Hungarian rhetoric. By framing independent journalism, foreign support, and political pluralism as threats to national sovereignty, the Fidesz regime erodes democratic institutions and undermines accountability. Government manipulation justifies censorship and weakens opposition parties. The Act exemplifies how authoritarian leaders can use nationalist rhetoric to disguise the dismantling of democratic systems. Without the checks and balances provided by independent media and legitimate opposition, Hungary’s government lacks the elements of a genuine democracy. Orbán’s efforts to silence opposition represent the true threat to national sovereignty, diminishing civic freedoms and encouraging authoritarianism in Hungary.

Works Cited

Article 19. “Hungary: Defence of National Sovereignty Act must be repealed.” January 2024, https://www.article19.org/resources/hungary-defence-of-national-sovereignty-act-must-be-repealed/.

Article 19. “Hungary: Foreign funding bill poses worst threat to independent media in years.” June 2025, https://www.article19.org/resources/hungary-foreign-funding-bill-poses-worst-threat-to-independent-media-in-years/.

Bayer, Lili. “Transparency watchdog investigated as Hungary tries to curb ‘foreign influence.’” The Guardian, June 2024, https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jun/26/hungary-transparency-watchdog-investigated-curb-foreign-influence.

Bognár, Eva. “Branding independent newsrooms as foreign agents, and threatening them with financial sanctions: Hungary’s Sovereignty Protection Office in action.” International Press Institute, 15 October 2024, https://ipi.media/hungary-sovereignty-protection-act/#:~:text=The%20SPO%20was%20set%20up,in%20the%20past%20ten%20years.

Ésik, Sándor. “Viktor Orbán’s Newest Tool for Crushing Dissent.” Journal of Democracy, February 2024, https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/online-exclusive/viktor-orbans-newest-tool-for-crushing-dissent/.

Garamvolgyi, Flora, and Jennifer Rankin. “Viktor Orbán’s grip on Hungary’s courts threatens rule of law, warns judge.” The Guardian, 14 August 2022, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/aug/14/viktor-orban-grip-on-hungary-courts-threatens-rule-of-law-warns-judge.

Polyák, Gábor, et al. “Information Patterns and News Bubbles in Hungary.” Media and Communication, vol. 10, no. 3, 2022, pp. 133-145. Cognito Press, https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/5373/5373.

Ridgwell, Henry. “Hungary and EU Face Off Over New Sovereign Defense Law.” VOA, 8 February 2024, https://www.voanews.com/a/hungary-and-eu-face-off-over-new-sovereign-defense-law/7480060.html.

Scheppele, Kim Lane. “How Viktor Orbán Wins.” Journal of Democracy, vol. 33, no. 3, 2022, pp. 45-61, https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/how-viktor-orban-wins/.

Urbán, Ágnes, et al. “How Public Service Media Disinformation Shapes Hungarian Public Discourse.” Media and Communication, vol. 11, no. 4, 2023, pp. 62-72, https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v11i4.7148.

Waldner, David, and Ellen Lust. “Unwelcome Change: Coming to Terms with Democratic Backsliding.” Annual Review of Political Science, vol. 21, 2018, pp. 93-113, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-050517- 114628.