Hungary and Uzbekistan - but are they serious?
This article, by the Daily News Hungary, raises questions that aren’t addressed in the information presented. This comes at the same time as Hungary continues fighting against transparency, by bringing forward a law that attacks the CSOS which have and should keep the Hungarian government accountable. The Washington Post notes that President “Orbán has for years enacted crackdowns on NGOs and independent media , passing laws that critics say seek to stigmatize and obstruct groups that provide protection for women and minorities, offer legal and human rights assistance and expose official corruption.” The new proposed law continues its move toward limiting the works of groups, as it “outlines a broad definition of what constitutes a threat to sovereignty. Organizations may be targeted if they oppose or portray in a negative light values such as Hungary’s democratic character, national unity, traditional family structures, or Christian culture — suggesting that even legitimate criticism of government policy could be treated as a national security threat.”
Unfortunately, the cooperation between Uzbekistan and Hungary may be simply window dressing, as it is clear that the Hungarian government wants to limit oversight. The question is whether Hungary is at all serious in its approach which in turn makes it questionable what the purpose of this cooperation should be. Could this cooperation be another mechanism to bring all the parts of government in line, and to ensure that the civil service follows the government’s position, and any actions that seem to be “corrupt” then they can move against them.
This has the same impact for the Uzbek government as well, since it seems that neither government are aligned with each other’s approach. As they noted, “[a] lso, as a practical result of the meeting, an agreement was reached on developing cooperation in increasing the potential of personnel in combating corruption, organizing educational programs for improving the qualifications of employees, creating internship programs, and implementing joint projects.”
What should be done in these instances? As always we hope that the local CSOs can genuinely ensure that the approach suggested is legitimate and to keep the government accountable. And, in the second instance, CSOs and donors need to support the to fight against laws limiting the work of the CSOs. In this instance, the need for continuing media focus is key, and as I have said on many occasions transparency and accountability is essential. Finally, as we say in this part of the world, hope dies last.
Links: