Table of Contents – Domestic – It is already certain that Budakeszi will not win the publicity contest

It cannot be said that the publicity-oriented campaign particularly affected the leadership of the small agglomeration settlement, which has close ties to Budapest, which the Hungarian Two-Tailed Dog Party gave to the Metropolitan city. at their first meeting. The city of Budakeszi, unlike many other cities, not only supports transparency in its work, but also makes it particularly difficult to know the data and conclusions on two points.

This is the lowest! The goal of the campaign is to make Hungarian cities more transparent, more accountable and more open to civic initiatives. However, this is impossible without the knowledge and experience of local political actors. The position of the outsider cannot be changed, more than civil pressure is required. We must work out together how this data can be produced simply, cheaply and sustainably and, most importantly, delivered to the citizens as understandable, verifiable and comparable information.

he is reading That’s the minimum! page, where they want as many of the representatives sitting in the local groups to join their campaign. Budakeszin previously also said that two representatives were responsible for more transparency, but they were not re-elected on June 9, and the Fidesz-majority group that was formed in October does not even appear from its side. ‘town that they are in person from whom also standing at all (for that you need the election page to browse).

While in the case of settlements or other areas, anyone can see the publication of assets of representatives and elected municipal officials on the website of the local government without any problem, in Budakeszin this is only possible in context extremely complicated procedure. The arrangement is organizational and functional in its rules although it has been registered (according to the Ötv.) that “verification of the producer’s assets – except for the identification data provided for verification – is public for the public good”, but in practice this is not possible only after a favorable evaluation of the application submitted to the Real and Financial Committee, which also indicates the reason for the interest, In the municipal building, documents based on paper can be seen, and copies cannot be made of them. .

The case brought by the representative of the Dog Party, András Jakab brought outno history. In 2019, the member of parliament Bernadett Szél wanted to see the asset declarations, but she was not allowed either. Their reasoning accordingly, no, because with the Information Act, the legislator introduced the principle of data management that is linked to a purpose and its use among public personal data for the public good. On the basis of this legal provision, public personal data may be distributed in the public interest only and only for the purpose of exercising a right or fulfilling an obligation.

At the same time, György Magyar, a lawyer and election expert, told the Index that according to his opinion

but the purpose of the Freedom of Information Act, based on Section 1, is to “determine the basic rules for data processing within its scope to ensure that data controllers respect the privacy of natural persons, as well on. that the free flow of data and the transparency of public affairs will be realized by declaring the right to know and the dissemination of data for the public good and for the public good”.

Section 26 (2) referred to by the city refers to the “distribution” of data, which is not the same as the “disclosure” section. According to György Magyar, the principle of purpose-linked data management is not violated by making the asset declaration public and publishing it on the website, because the local government law holds out that the asset declaration is public information for the public good, i.e. “Making public, accessible or accessible is ordered by law for the public good”, thus ensuring ” transparency of public affairs by declaring the right of access to and dissemination of data of public interest and public interest”.

It is true that Infotv. Mentioned in paragraph (2) of § 26, Infotv. Appendix No. 1 specifically provides for asset verification, but since the Local Government Act does, a legal basis and purpose of publication is provided.

No one can take a camera

In accordance with another provision of the Local Government Act, board meetings are open to the public. On the other hand, opinions are already divided as to what the public means in practice. According to the MKKP, if board meetings are open to the public, anyone can record or broadcast them. Except

According to György Magyar, the public nature of the board meeting does not mean that it can be recorded and broadcast in real time, so the SZMSZ legally restricts audio and video recording. The board and the representative have separate rights. Audio and video recordings may not be recorded without express permission.

In any case, nothing prevents local governments from giving voters the opportunity to follow meetings of representative bodies in real time. The village television even small towns like Pomáz, Törökbalint or Dósd use the video transmission option of the web channel. Budakeszi on this channel in 2021 November because he does not mediate.

We also contacted the town of Budakeszi about the matter, but they did not respond to our written questions.

(Cover photo: Ottilia Győri / Facebook)