Yesterday I called attention to the extremely low numbers of women in the parliamentary delegations of the two government parties. The Christian Democratic (KDNP) decision makers are even less generous than Fidesz when it comes to accepting women in their caucus. But they always make sure that they have at least one woman in their ranks. Once the long-serving Rózsa Hoffmann, former undersecretary in charge of education, retired in 2018, they needed a new token woman.
Hoffmann’s replacement was Hajnalka Juhász, a lawyer and political scientist, whose political patron seems to have been László Trócsányi, her dissertation adviser at the University of Szeged. She was initially invited to work for the ministry of justice and named ministerial commissioner in charge of the “Hungary Helps” program, which was set up to assist persecuted Christians all over the world. And then she was chosen to be a member of the KDNP parliamentary delegation.
In March 2018, when it was pretty clear that she would soon be a member of parliament, she gave an interview to the Fidesz-financed Demokrata in which she was asked about the central theme of her “Christian politics of women issues.” Her answer revealed that, in fact, she was not at all concerned about women’s issues as most people understand the concept. Her real interest was in Hungarian minority issues in the neighboring countries.
Fast forward to the present. Hajnalka Juhász accepted the shameful role of being one of the three KDNP members of parliament who submitted the “political declaration” on the “rejection of the binding effect of the Istanbul Convention.” In fact, she was the one who delivered the declaration’s justification in today’s parliamentary session. Needless to say, the Hungarian parliament voted against ratifying the Istanbul Convention.
Before I examine the Orbán government’s objections to the Istanbul Convention and the timing of the vote, let’s take an admittedly tabloid-like side trip to Hajnalka Juhász’s two very busy Facebook pages. At first glance, especially if one doesn’t know that we are dealing here with a member of parliament, one might think that the owner of the page is a wannabe model in search of a job. Most of the comments come from males, commenting on her looks. Strangers write: “You are sensational,” “I love you,” “You’re super,” “You are very pretty and clever too.” Her second, more official site is again a place for a whole gallery of her artistic photos. Her greatest admirer is a certain István Fazekas, allegedly former chief of medicine in District XVIII, who writes embarrassingly intimate confessions of love for her on both of her pages. At first, I thought Fazekas was her husband, but that turned out not to be the case. Yet she didn’t feel that she should remove these extremely intimate declarations of love from her pages. All in all, the issues of women’s rights, equality, and defense from domestic violence will never be on her political agenda.
The document that the three KDNP members — Imre Vajnai, Hajnalka Juhász, and Lőrinc Nacsa — submitted emphasizes that Hungarian laws are perfectly adequate for the protection of families, children, and women. Although, it said, “we must pay attention to the challenges of the modern world” even if “they bypass Hungary” at the moment, Christian values must be defended. The two objections cited in document were the convention’s reference to “societal gender” and to the right of asylum. Hajnalka Juhász explained these vague objections in greater detail. Apparently, Articles 3, 6, 60, and 61 of the convention are the ones to which the Hungarian parliament objected. Article 3c reads that “’gender’ shall mean the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for women and men.” Article 6 states that “Parties shall undertake to include a gender perspective in the implementation and evaluation of the impact of the provisions of this Convention and to promote and effectively implement policies of equality between women and men and the empowerment of women.”
In addition, the KDNP document claims that it is “possible to interpret” articles 60 and 61 as a “compulsory guarantee of asylum for women.” Their first objection is most likely to the paragraph that reads: “Parties shall take the necessary legislative or other measures to ensure that gender-based violence against women may be recognized as a form of persecution within the meaning of Article 1, A (2), of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and as a form of serious harm giving rise to complementary/subsidiary protection.” In Article 61 the objectionable passage is that “Parties shall take the necessary legislative or other measures to ensure that victims of violence against women who are in need of protection, regardless of their status or residence, shall not be returned under any circumstances to any country where their life would be at risk or where they might be subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”
Source: Péter Hoppál’s Facebook page
Why did the Orbán government decide to bring this “political declaration” to a vote now? For six years they have postponed ratifying the convention, so I assume that they could have ignored it further still. On the surface, it looks like a useless exercise. So, why in such a hurry? I know of no international reason that would demand immediate action in the midst of a pandemic and a brewing economic crisis. I’m inclined to think that this is payback for the recent assertive attitude of the women of the opposition, which was directed primarily against the inefficiencies of the government’s handling of the pandemic. In the last few days they demanded the resignation of ministers and at least one of them, Tímea Szabó, called Miklós Kásler, minister of human resources who is allegedly in charge of healthcare, a butcher. They dared to question the wisdom of sending protective gear abroad while there is not enough at home. As far as the government is concerned, these women need to be silenced.
Today, in parliament, women members of parliament held up posters displaying the invectives they have had to endure in the past from their male colleagues. The placards read: “Take your clothes off, Ági!” “The fact that you’re pretty doesn’t mean that you are smart,” “Why don’t you shut up, girly?” “Who is looking after the child?” and similar lines that, I’m sure, most of the guys found funny. At least Péter Szijjártó in front is having a jolly time. By the way, there is a good possibility that these women will be punished for their unseemly behavior and pay high fines, as happened many times earlier.
