One year ahead of Hungary’s pivotal parliamentary elections, Prime Minister Viktor Orban faces an unprecedented challenge: the real possibility of defeat.
Since returning to power in 2010, Orban and his party Fidesz have consistently secured electoral victories, often by substantial margins. However, recent polling data and political trends indicate a weakening grip on power. Independent surveys over the past four months suggest Fidesz may lose its parliamentary majority in 2026, marking a turning point in Hungarian politics.
Yet in Hungary, electoral forecasts rarely tell the full story. Orban’s past resilience has been largely attributed to his command of state resources, control over the media, and strategic use of populist narratives. As the ruling elite braces for a competitive election, the government has begun deploying a series of extraordinary legal and constitutional reforms, signalling its intention to fight what may be its toughest battle yet—one that critics argue could unfold with few democratic safeguards.
Strategic Constitutional Changes
This week, the Hungarian National Assembly, where Fidesz holds a constitutional supermajority, passed the fifteenth package of amendments to the country’s fundamental law since 2011. These changes span 11 articles and serve three broad purposes: mobilising the Fidesz base with symbolic gestures, introducing mechanisms to limit opposition influence, and—strikingly—preparing for a potential post-Orban transition.
One populist clause enshrines the “right to cash” as a constitutional entitlement, a likely appeal to rural voters wary of digital finance. Another amendment, already controversial, restricts internal migration and property acquisition in specific communities under the pretext of preserving local identity. This measure is seen as a response to urban populations moving into traditionally conservative rural regions, potentially altering voting dynamics.
Equally notable is the government’s stance on social conservatism. The amended constitution now places explicit emphasis on “the father being a man and the mother a woman”, and includes a general ban on narcotics, though lacking legal enforcement mechanisms. It also introduces protections for children’s right to “an identity matching their birth sex”, anchored in “Christian cultural values”. According to critics, such language could be invoked to suppress protests, restrict freedom of expression, or disqualify electoral candidates deemed incompatible with these values.
Electoral Engineering and the Opposition’s Challenge
The Hungarian government has also redrawn electoral districts, a move widely viewed as gerrymandering. In December, the number of parliamentary seats allocated to Budapest was reduced from 18 to 16, with two seats transferred to suburban constituencies. Given that urban areas tend to support the opposition, while rural districts lean towards Fidesz, this shift is expected to work in the ruling party’s favour.
Moreover, a newly adopted “foreign agents” law, still limited in scope, raises concerns among civil society and the press. Media outlets anticipate that the law’s requirements may soon be tightened, further restricting dissent and foreign-funded organisations. These developments mirror tactics employed in Russia and raise alarms about Hungary’s democratic trajectory.
One clause particularly alarming to legal experts allows the government to revoke the citizenship of dual nationals—excluding EU and EEA citizens—on the basis of unspecified criteria, such as acting against “Hungarian values”. This measure could be used to target diaspora Hungarians or opposition donors holding foreign citizenships, effectively removing their political rights.
International Context and the US Response
International reactions to Hungary’s internal developments have been muted, particularly under the current US administration. On 15 April, the United States lifted sanctions imposed in January by the previous Biden administration on Antal Rogan, a key Orban ally who oversees the government’s propaganda machinery. The decision, personally conveyed by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio to Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto, came despite US documents reaffirming longstanding corruption allegations.
Rubio clarified that the lifting of sanctions was not based on exoneration but on shifting political priorities. The message was clear: under the Trump administration, Washington no longer intends to penalise Budapest for internal conduct, regardless of legal or ethical considerations. This has been interpreted in Hungary as a green light for further consolidation of power without fear of international repercussions.
Preparing for Uncertainty
Unusually, the latest constitutional amendments also contain provisions that would limit the Prime Minister’s powers—though only from 2026, coinciding with the next parliamentary term. These changes include curbs on the ability to unilaterally declare states of emergency or enact laws without parliamentary support, and are conditional on securing a two-thirds majority, which Orban’s rivals are unlikely to obtain.
The timing of these constraints suggests Orban’s administration is hedging against the possibility of defeat. While he retains full authority for the remainder of his current term, the introduction of limits on emergency powers from the start of the next term indicates a recognition within Fidesz that its dominance may not be assured beyond the 2026 election.
This paradox—consolidating power while simultaneously preparing for its loss—highlights the high stakes of the upcoming vote. Analysts note that several senior figures in the current administration could face legal scrutiny if removed from office. The breadth and depth of the constitutional reforms reflect an effort to build political and legal firewalls in the event of a change in government.
Conclusion
Hungary is entering a critical phase in its political evolution. The 2026 elections may represent the most consequential contest since the democratic transition. Viktor Orban’s response—an aggressive reshaping of the constitutional landscape, strategic electoral manipulation, and intensified rhetoric on traditional values—underscores the ruling party’s determination to maintain control.
Yet the very nature of the reforms also suggests that Orban, for the first time in over a decade, is no longer confident of inevitable victory. As opposition parties regroup and international observers prepare to monitor developments, Hungary is poised for a turbulent electoral cycle—one in which the rules of the game are being rewritten in real time.
Read also:
Orban Prioritises Russian Gas Despite Expected Western Energy Shifts Under Trump
