Skip to content

Text · Comparison of two versions

Changes from plenary report to adopted text

A-8-2018-0250 → TA-8-2018-0340

From
A-8-2018-0250 Plenary report of 4 Jul 2018
To
TA-8-2018-0340 Adopted text of 12 Sept 2018
Changes
19 changes to the text
Paragraphs
+8 added · −160 removed · 20 changed
More facts (2)
Title (from)
on a proposal calling on the Council to determine, pursuant to Article 7(1) of the Treaty on European Union, the existence of a clear risk of a serious breach by Hungary of the values on which the Union is founded
Title (to)
The situation in Hungary

Every difference

The full paragraph comparison, packaging included; long runs of unchanged paragraphs are folded. One part of the text per page.

Part 9 of 9: SUGGESTIONS

RemovedSUGGESTIONS

RemovedThe Committee on Women's Rights and Gender Equality calls on the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions into its motion for a resolution:

Removed– having regard to the report of the UN Working Group on the issue of discrimination against women in law and in practice, 27th of May, 2016,

Removed– having regard to the reasoned opinions by the EU Commission with regards to EU law on equal treatment of men and women in employment and occupation (Equal Treatment Directive, Directive 2006/54/EC) as well as the Maternity Leave Directive (Council Directive 92/85/EEC), 27th of April 2017,

RemovedA. whereas Article 8 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) stipulates that equality between women and men is a fundamental principle of the Union, which must therefore also be a core concern of all Member States;

RemovedB. whereas the European Union is founded on the values of respect for the rule of law and respect for human rights, including gender equality and the rights of people belonging to minorities, and whereas those values are universal and common to the Member States (Article 2 TEU);

RemovedC. whereas Hungary occupies, with 50.8 points, the second to last place in the European comparison of the European Institute for Gender Equality’s Gender Equality Index 2017 and has, furthermore, lost 1.6 points since 2010;

RemovedD. whereas it is a legitimate expectation that non-governmental organisations have a transparent financial background;

RemovedE. whereas Hungary has been strongly criticised by various international human rights organisations for its backlash against human rights and the restrictions imposed upon the functioning of its civil society, including women’s rights organisations; whereas the restrictive regulations and policies put in place, as described below, have significantly hindered women’s rights organisations that provide unique services for victims of gender-based and domestic violence and put them at risk of being excluded from tax and other benefits;

RemovedF. whereas Hungary is one of the top countries of origin of victims of human trafficking within the Union;

RemovedG. whereas, although Hungary has a strong national health system and public health insurance and despite the recommendations of various UN treaty monitoring bodies, the cost of modern contraception is wholly excluded from Hungary's health scheme, which offers no reimbursement for any method of contraception and thus creates an obstacle to modern family planning and Hungary is one of a few Member States that requires a prescription for emergency contraception or the “morning after” pill, which goes against the 2015 recommendation from the Commission that emergency contraceptives be made available over the counter; whereas, with the exception of emergency care, undocumented migrant women are not able to access any health care, which also prevents them from obtaining any prenatal care; whereas, despite the concerns of the United Nation’s Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), which called on the government to ensure access to safe abortion without subjecting women to mandatory counselling and a medically unnecessary waiting period, those requirements are still in practice and medical abortion is still not available, thus complicating and stigmatising women’s access to those healthcare services;

RemovedH. whereas the definition of family in the Hungarian constitution as “marriage and partner-child relationships” is outdated and based on conservative beliefs; whereas same-sex marriage is banned; whereas almost 70 % of the respondents in the 2014 Fundamental Rights Agency’s LGBT survey reported avoiding certain locations or places in fear of being harassed or assaulted on account of being LGBTI;

RemovedI. whereas out of the 47 members of the Council of Europe, 30 have so far ratified the Istanbul Convention and another 15 members, including Hungary, have signed the Convention but have not yet ratified; whereas progress on the process of ratification in Hungary has stalled since February 2017; whereas, although legislation criminalising domestic violence was introduced in 2013, its implementation is problematic and the definition of domestic violence does not include sexual violence; whereas, furthermore, Hungary does not have a holistic strategy or action plan on preventing and combating violence against women; whereas the latest research carried out by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) shows that evidence of widespread gender violence is present: according to 2015 data from the European Institute for Gender Equality, 27,7 % of women in Hungary have experienced physical violence, sexual violence, or both, since the age 15 and at least 50 women die every year at the hands of their relatives or partners and hundreds of thousands of women are regularly abused within their families; whereas, according to women’s rights organisations, the perpetrator, in 95 % of cases of violence, is a man and the victim is a women or a girl whereas many women are reluctant to report abuse since they are confronted with a hostile environment in police stations and courts; whereas law enforcement officers and the judiciary are largely ineffective in pursuing and prosecuting abusers, which additionally deters victims of violence from reporting and fosters distrust in authorities; whereas there is a culture of victim-blaming from both authorities and social circles;

RemovedJ. whereas CEDAW’s Concluding observations in 2013 called on Hungary, amongst other recommendations, to review its family and gender equality policies in order to ensure that the former do not restrict the full enjoyment by women of their right to non-discrimination and equality, to ensure appropriate remedies for victims of discrimination on the grounds of intersecting factors. to systematically carry out gender impact assessments of current and proposed laws and to ensure that the new legislative framework does not bring about a regression with its implementation; whereas those recommendations have not, to date, been duly implemented by any government; whereas no implementation plan has been elaborated for those recommendations;

RemovedK. whereas harmful gender stereotypes and assumptions about women’s roles in society are widespread in Hungarian society, including discrimination on grounds of sex; whereas the Hungarian government takes a regressive approach to gender issues, and uses the promotion of ‘family mainstreaming’ – replacing gender mainstreaming – in the context of a desired demographic increase and misinterprets and misuses the concepts of ‘gender’ and ‘gender equality’;

RemovedL. whereas the rate of employment among women in Hungary has seen a significant rise compared to the 2010 level;

Removed1. Notes the efforts taken in recent years to achieve a better reconciliation of work and private life; recalls the Commission's proposal for a directive on work-life balance for parents and carers presented in April 2017 and encourages the Hungarian government to contribute to its swift adoption;

Removed2. Welcomes the fact that between 2010 and 2016 the available places in nurseries increased by around 23 % and that in 2017 Hungary introduced a new and more flexible nursery system that aligns better with local circumstances and helps women to go back to the labour market;

Removed3. Deplores nevertheless the fact that Hungary has still not met the Union’s Barcelona Targets and calls on the Hungarian Government to prioritise those targets and to tailor its family policies to the needs of the most vulnerable members of society;

Removed4. Deplores the reinterpretation and narrowing of gender equality policies towards family policies and recalls the National Strategy for the Promotion of Social Equality of Women and Men – Goals and Objectives 2010–2021, which Hungary has not yet implemented; points out that a misinterpretation of the concept of gender has dominated the public discourse in Hungary and deplores this wilful misinterpretation of the terms ‘gender’ and ‘gender equality’; emphasises that the aim of gender equality policy in all areas of society must be to ensure that no one is discriminated on the grounds of his or her gender, that the rights of every individual are safeguarded and that the involvement of women and men at all levels of social life on an equal basis is guaranteed; calls, therefore, for a return to the idea of gender mainstreaming as an analytical and policy-making tool and for the national strategy to be implemented with those objectives in all areas; calls on the Hungarian government to implement the 2013 recommendations of CEDAW without further delay and to elaborate and update its stalled National Strategy or to replace it with a new gender equality strategy, ensuring concrete deadlines and responsible actors and providing funding and monitoring mechanisms for its effective implementation, while consulting throughout the process with women’s rights organisations;

Removed5. Deplores the narrow definition of family which discriminates against cohabitants and same-sex couples; reminds Hungary that discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation is prohibited;

Removed6. Highlights the importance of the empowerment of women, in particular with regard to their political, economic and social rights, as a precondition for an environment where families can flourish;

Removed7. Deplores the very low number of women in political decision-making positions and, in that connection, the fact that until now only 10 % of the members of the Hungarian Parliament have been women, the lowest proportion in any Member State, and that there is no female minister in the national government; emphasises that the involvement of women in political decision-making on an equal footing with men is fundamental to democracy; recalls the recommendations by CEDAW and the OSCE to implement legislative quotas for national elections; stresses that political parties should lead by example with regard to equal opportunities and gender balance and introduce effective legislative measures to increase women’s participation in political life and decision-making; points out that a better balance between work and family life and a shared responsibility between parents are important steps towards higher representation of women in political decision-making on all levels;

Removed8. Notes that the current employment rate of women is 61,2 %, while the greatest improvement in women’s employment is to be found in the group of women who raise children under the age of 6, in light of the positive measures taken by the Hungarian Government since 2010 to help families and women with children, which include, inter alia, “the child care fee extra” and the new day-care system;

Removed9. Welcomes the fact that since 2010 the Hungarian government has adopted several social, social inclusion, family policy, health policy and educational measures, addressed to, among others, Roma, such as the Roma mother-child health programme, training Roma health guardians, training Roma health representatives as well as early childhood development programs; encourages the Hungarian government to continue to further implement those policies and measures and to provide evidence as soon as possible about their impact on Roma women;

Removed10. Is worried about the shrinking space for civil society organisations and the attempts to control non-governmental organisations by restricting their ability to carry out legitimate work; is concerned about the impact of Hungary’s Law on the Transparency of Organisations Receiving Foreign Funds on civil society organisations that receive funds from the Union, the EEA and the third countries as well as the introduction of the so-called 'Stop Soros' legislative package; highlights that those developments negatively impact the functioning of non-governmental organisations, including many organisations which are working for the rights of women, LGBTI people, people with disabilities, ethnic and religious minorities, migrants, refugees, asylum seekers and other groups in a vulnerable situation and which are crucial for the protection of fundamental human rights and the functioning and progress of society since they provide services, raise the awareness of professionals and the public and engage in capacity building, as well as advocate for and contribute to legislative and policy changes to improve equality; notes with concern the atmosphere in society, which has been fuelled by the policies implemented in recent years, and condemns the mistrust and hostility which many women's rights advocates and academics encounter as a result of their commitment; urges the Hungarian government to promote and improve democracy and human rights issues and to repeal the laws that stigmatise those organisations that use foreign funding; encourages the government to utilise instead the expertise and experiences of women’s rights organisations when planning and implementing legislative and policy measures in the field of gender equality and women's rights and to make adequate use of the established consultative forums in that regard;

Removed11. Proposes that a European Democracy Fund be set up for the strengthened support of civil society and NGOs working in the fields of democracy and human rights to be managed by the Commission in order to strengthen civil society actors such as girls and women’s rights organisations;

Removed12. Regrets that developments in Hungary have led to a serious deterioration of the rule of law over the past few years, without which no rights can be guaranteed sufficiently in a non-discriminatory fashion regarding women and women of minorities such as Roma, migrants and LBT women;

Removed13. Is concerned about the hostile climate towards migrants and refugees in Hungary; condemns the hate speech coming from state and government officials; calls on the Hungarian government to ensure that the human rights of migrants and refugees are reinforced;

Removed14. Recalls that violence against women in Hungary, as in all other Member States, is a persistent structural violation of human rights; calls on the Hungarian government to ratify the Istanbul Convention without reservations as soon as possible and commit to incorporating its provisions into domestic law, which would constitute an important step in changing the cultural norm of domestic abuse and protecting women and girls victims of violence; condemns the fact that domestic violence must be perpetrated twice before being treated as a criminal offence; calls for bodies which provide information, advice and assistance to continue receiving funding, as a way of offering women effective protection and safety; calls on the Commission to continue its dialogue with the Hungarian government, in cooperation with the Council of Europe, and to address its concerns and, in particular, to clarify misleading interpretations of the Istanbul Convention on the definition of gender-based violence and the definition of gender in Article 3(c) and (d), which are currently preventing a comprehensive approach to the Convention, in accordance with the General Remarks of the Commissioner of Human Rights of the Council of Europe;

Removed15. Calls on the Hungarian government to amend the Criminal Code in order to include in the definition of domestic violence all acts of physical violence, including physical harm, bodily injury or assault, sexual violence, stalking and harassment, the infliction of fear of imminent physical harm, bodily injury, or assault, and coercive control, i.e. psychological and economic violence that forms part of a pattern of domination through intimidation, isolation, degradation, and deprivation, as well as physical assault; calls further on the Hungarian government to amend the Act on Restraining Orders in order to expand the scope of domestic violence victims to include and protect all victims, including those who do not cohabitate or have children with their abuser, or are not considered as relatives (e.g. intimate partners), and in order to expand the period of the ban on contact for as long as needed; calls finally on the Hungarian government to amend procedural legislation to ensure that domestic violence constitutes a crime and is subject to public prosecution with penalties;

Removed16. Strongly recommends that law enforcement officers and the judiciary be trained on best practice standards with regard to responding to domestic violence, in cooperation with victims support organisations and in line with international human rights standards; strongly recommends in addition to provide adequate training, pay due attention to the role of medical staff in the prevention of and response to domestic violence, and increase the capacity of health care personnel for this purpose;

Removed17. Recognises the efforts made in the anti-human trafficking laws and encourages the government to continue to improve its data collection, improve the services for trafficking victims and to tackle the demand by criminalising the purchase of services from victims of trafficking, including sexual services;

Removed18. Stresses the importance of the right of women to self-determination and, in this context, the importance of respecting their sexual and reproductive rights, including access to swift abortion care, by making sure that emergency contraception is easy accessible and patients’ rights to a safe, non-violent and women-centred birth are respected; urges the Hungarian government to ensure access to affordable contraceptive methods by fully or partially covering the costs of modern contraceptive methods under its public health insurance and to improve access to emergency contraception by eliminating the prescription requirement; calls on the Hungarian government to remove barriers in the access to safe abortion services such as the unavailability of medical abortion, biased counselling and the mandatory waiting period requirements;

Removed19. Strongly condemns, in this context, the ill-treatment and discrimination of minorities, in particular Roma women, in fields such as access to healthcare; draws attention to the cases of forced sterilisation which have come to light and which constitute an unacceptable violation of the human rights of the women concerned; denounces the particularly harmful restrictions for undocumented migrant women who are excluded from any access to medical care that is not emergency care;

Removed20. Acknowledges that the programmes launched, which aim to foster the education and employment of Roma women, will train social caretakers, nurses and social assistants in social, child welfare, child protection and education institutions and that church organisation and foundations, as well as the state, will receive support for the employment of Roma women; asks the Hungarian government to deliver information and figures about the concrete impact of those programmes;

Removed21. Welcomes the establishment of the Women in Research Careers Presidential Commission within the Hungarian Academy of Sciences which aims to increase the proportion of women among professors and the doctors of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences as well as to raise the interest of girls in education in natural sciences;

Removed22. Condemns the attacks on free teaching and research, in particular on gender studies the aim of which is to analyse power relationships, discrimination and gender relations in society and find solutions to forms of inequality and which have become the target of defamation campaigns; calls for the fundamental democratic principle of educational freedom to be fully restored and safeguarded;

Removed23. Emphasises the importance of prejudice-free and stereotype-free upbringing and education; calls for this to be taken into account when a new national curriculum is drawn up, with a view to guaranteeing in the future the provision of education which does not encourage stereotyping and the denigration of women and girls, and also of men and boys;

Removed24. Expresses concern about the policies implemented in recent years and the use of rhetoric and symbols to create an attitude, widely held in society, which reduces women to the role of mothers and grants them respect only in that role; points out that this restricts the freedom of both women and men to develop and take decisions and deprives women of their rights;

Removed25. Emphasises that women’s rights and equal rights are shared, fundamental European values; deplores the fact that Hungary is increasingly turning its back on those values and thus leaving itself isolated;

Removed26. Believes that the current situation in Hungary represents a clear risk of a serious breach of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU and warrants the launch of the procedure set out in Article 7(1) TEU.

Sources & citation

Where the facts on this page come from, and how to cite it.

Data source
Licensed CC BY 4.0.
Retrieved
29 September 2026

Cite as

European Parliament (2018). “Changes between A-8-2018-0250 and TA-8-2018-0340”. Text, 12 September 2018. from A-8-2018-0250, to TA-8-2018-0340. EU Parl Watch Research. https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/A-8-2018-0250/compare/TA-8-2018-0340?all=1&part=9 (retrieved 29 September 2026). Data: European Parliament Open Data, https://data.europarl.europa.eu/ (CC BY 4.0).
BibTeX
@misc{epw-text-2018-09-12,
  author = {{European Parliament}},
  title = {{Changes between A-8-2018-0250 and TA-8-2018-0340}},
  year = {2018},
  date = {2018-09-12},
  howpublished = {\url{https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/A-8-2018-0250/compare/TA-8-2018-0340?all=1&part=9}},
  url = {https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/A-8-2018-0250/compare/TA-8-2018-0340?all=1&part=9},
  urldate = {2026-09-29},
  publisher = {EU Parl Watch Research},
  note = {Text. from A-8-2018-0250, to TA-8-2018-0340. Data: European Parliament Open Data (CC BY 4.0)}
}