For more than a decade, Hungary was one of the most hostile environments for civil society in the EU. That changed after Tisza’s election victory in April 2026. Within weeks, the new government stopped smearing CSOs, began treating them as partners and started acting on their input. In June 2026 it abolished the Sovereignty Protection Office, which had investigated organisations for allegedly serving foreign interests. Most of the old legal framework is still in place, though. The ban on LGBTI-related assemblies remains in the law and the constitution, and the “Lex NGO” audit rules still apply. There are no binding consultation guarantees and no real incentives for philanthropy. Organisations investigated under the old regime have been offered no remedy, and a new asset-recovery office has gained powers over CSOs. Independent media remain under pressure.
Civic Environment Report 2026: Hungary
Mixed – Enabling Leaning
| Standard | Score | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| Cluster A — Institutional and Political Environment and Narratives of CSOs | 2.6 | cluster average |
| A1 Equal treatment | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| A2 Political recognition as partners | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| A3 Refrained authorities from smearing | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| A4 No weaponization of state powers and good governance principles | 2 | Restrictive leaning |
| A5 Transparent and open public institutions | 2 | Restrictive leaning |
| Cluster B — Legal and Financial Framework for CSOs | 3 | cluster average |
| B1 Free establishment and operation | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| B2 CSOs enjoy a safe space and protection from arbitrariness | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| B3 Liberality of resourcing | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| B4 Enabling fiscal environment | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| B5 Free expressions of criticism | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| Cluster C — Public Engagement and Perceptions towards the Work of CSOs | 2.6 | cluster average |
| C1 Citizens' trust | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| C2 Pluralistic presentation in media | 2 | Restrictive leaning |
| C3 Free engagement | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| C4 CSOs embedded in communities | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| C5 Freedom of assembly | 2 | Restrictive leaning |
| Cluster D — CSOs as Policy Makers | 2.6 | cluster average |
| D1 Right to participate in decision-making including in the policy cycle | 2 | Restrictive leaning |
| D2 Timely consultations and equal participation | 2 | Restrictive leaning |
| D3 Policies encourage cooperation with CSOs | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| D4 Free advocacy and watchdogging | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| D5 Government listens | 3 | Mostly enabling |
| Composite index (average of cluster scores) | 2.7 | between restrictive leaning and mostly enabling |