My paper presents the activities of a new legal institution established in 2014, the Committee on Legislation. First, I describe the current process of legislation, as acts of Parliament have been adopted in a legislative process that has in many aspects been reformed since 2014. Investigating whether the establishment of the Committee on Legislation has rendered the committee phase meaningless, the detailed debate in the committee a "needless round"-as amendment proposals are decided upon in the procedures of the Committee on Legislation, which itself may also have amendment proposals-is, in my opinion, also interesting. I will describe the circumstances and the reception of the establishment of the first Committee on Legislation, then I will deal with the procedural rules of this committee in detail. In my study, I will rely on the Act XXXVI on the National Assembly, the provisions of the Rules of Procedure of the national Assembly, the procedural rules of the Committee on Legislation and the relevant literature.
The most important function of parliaments is legislation, and in Hungary, this has been especially true for the nearly 30 years since the political changes in 1989-1990. Legislation was intense between 1990 and 2018, the Hungarian National Assembly adopted 4140 acts during this period. Most acts of Parliament were adopted during the second premiership of Viktor Orbán, almost twice as much as during the 1990-1994 parliamentary term. The reason for this was that the ruling parties with two-thirds of the seats in the National Assembly wanted to renew Hungary by adopting a new Fundamental Law, cardinal laws and a significant transformation of the legal system.[3] The process of legislation has five major phases: Phase 1: from submission to inclusion in the agenda; Phase 2: general debate at the plenary sitting; Phase 3: detailed debate in the committee; Phase 4: procedure of the Committee on Legislation; Phase 5: final phase at the plenary sitting.[4]
According to Paragraph (1) of Article 6 of the Fundamental Law, acts of Parliament may be initiated by the President of the Republic, the Government, a parliamentary committee or individual members of Parliament. Interestingly, during the 2014-2018 parliamentary term, the Government submitted 584 draft acts, 565 of which were adopted. 142 of the 169 proposals submitted by ruling party MPs were adopted, while only one of the 601 proposals submitted by opposition MPs. It were the committees that submitted the least number of proposals, 24 in total, and only 17 were adopted. The Fundamental Law of Hungary states that the President of the Republic may also initiate acts of Parliament; he, however, exercises this right only very rarely, in the above parliamentary term, for instance, he did not introduce any proposals.[5]
The draft acts must contain the title and text proposed by the person submitting it and a reasoning. The proposals must be fit for debate and decision-making, and their reasoning must indicate the expected social and estimated economic impacts in the case of adoption.[6] Proposals must be submitted as addressed to the Speaker of the National Assembly. This can be done in two ways: either in a printed form until the end of the day of sitting of the National Assembly or, in other cases, before the end of working hours or at any time in the electronic format specified by the Speaker. If a proposal is not duly submitted or damages the authority of the National Assembly, then the Speaker has the right to reject it. The person submitting
- 345/346 -
the proposal may request an ad-hoc position of the committee responsible for interpreting the provisions of the Rules of Procedure of the National Assembly (this is currently the Committee on Justice) within five working days, if at least five members of Parliament back his or her request. The document may not be subject to discussion until the adoption of the position of that committee. Within fifteen days as from the promulgation of the position, the person having submitted the proposal may request the decision of the National Assembly, the request may be to reject or sustain the position. If the procedures above resulted in favour of the rejection of the document, then it may not be subject to discussion and is regarded as closed. Proposals submitted in accordance with the Rules of Procedure of the National Assembly get a reference number. Documents submitted in printed form are regarded as submitted upon registration, documents submitted electronically (via ParLex) are regarded as submitted upon arrival. In the 1990s, the Government submitted multiplied proposals (in 650 copies in 1997); each of the President of the Republic, the relevant committee and MP submitted 1 copy and the secretary general was responsible for its copying. Submission with multiple copies is not typical any more, mostly because most of the draft acts are submitted via ParLex.[7]
Proposals of the President of the Republic, the Government and the commissions are included in the Order Book upon submission; this is, however, not automatic in case of proposals submitted by MPs.[8] The Order Book is the list of proposals that may be included in the agenda of the plenary sitting. This, however, does not mean that such proposals could not be included in the agenda of the plenary sitting, i.e. their discussion, in a timely manner. In case of draft acts submitted by MPs, the Speaker appoints a standing committee to conduct the procedure of including the proposal in the Order Book (hereinafter I refer to this committee as the committee responsible for the Order Book) Proposals submitted by MPs may be included in the Order Book if this is supported by that committee. This committee must decide on the inclusion in the Order Book within thirty days as from being appointed. If the proposer is not in the position to participate in the decision on the draft act, then he or she may move to postpone the decision at the chair of the committee one hour before the opening of the sitting. If there is no such request, the absence of the proposer will not prevent the procedure of the committee. The committee responsible for the Order Book informs the Speaker about its decision. If the procedure to include the proposal in the Order Book, the committee responsible for the Order Book will conduct the detailed debate as designated committee.[9]
If the motion is rejected by this committee, the MP still can get his or her proposal debated at the plenary sitting. If the leader of the parliamentary group the proposer belongs to requests it, the National Assembly will decide on the inclusion of the proposal in the Order Book. The number of such requests is, however, limited to 6 per sitting, and such requests may be submitted during the ordinary sitting during which the committee rejected the inclusion in the Order Book. This option is not available later on. The proposer may argue why the National Assembly should include his or her proposal in the Order Book in a maximum 5-min-ute speech at the plenary sitting, he or she is then followed by an MP from each parliamentary group or a representative or advocate of a minority for issues concerning the rights of minorities and the independent MP who first demands the floor among independent MPs. The speeches of these MPs are limited in two minutes, then the proposer may respond to their speeches in maximum 2 minutes.[10]
The Speaker designates a standing committee (hereinafter referred to as designated committee) to conduct the detailed debate on a draft act submitted by the Government, a parliamentary committee or the President of the Republic. In case of proposals submitted by individual MPs, the committee designated for inclusion in the Order Book is regarded as an appointed committee, even without separate designation. If the proposal has been submitted by a committee, then that committee may also be appointed to conduct the detailed debate. In the process of legislation, other standing committees and the committee representing the interests of minorities may also announce in writing that they wish to conduct a detailed
- 346/347 -
debate. Such announcements are to be made until the opening of the sitting the agenda of which includes the start of the general debate. The part(s) of the draft act to be debated is/are to be indicated. This committee is also called "committee connected to the debate" and, with the designated committee together, they are called discussing committees.[11]
This is where the so called 5-6-day rule appears in the process of legislation. It is important because a certain period of time must be left between the submission of the proposal and the commencement of the discussion in order that MPs have sufficient time to study and review the proposal. This rule means that there must be at least five days between the submission and the adoption of the agenda of the siting in which the start of the general debate is included. Furthermore, the general debate may be started six days after the submission. In practice this means that the general debate of draft acts submitted usually on Tuesday may open on Tuesday the next week. The general debate consists in debating the necessity and regulation principles of either the entire draft act or its certain parts.[12]
Amendment proposals may be submitted after the general debate is closed. The deadline for this is, if the draft act has been submitted by an MP, 04:00 PM on the third working day following the adoption of the agenda of the sitting with the closing of the general debate of the proposal. This is followed by third major phase of legislation, the detailed debate. This opens on the week following the closing of the general debate. In this, the designated committee checks if the draft act meets the four requirements of Paragraph (1) of Section 44.
In addition, the committees debate on the amendment proposals and further intentions for amendment may also be formulated. The discussing committee assesses the amendment proposals and adopts a position on them. This committee decides
- which amendment proposal it backs
- whether it sustains any non-supported amendment proposals with its own amendments
- and it formulates further intentions for amendment.[13]
The committee includes these amendments in a motion, the committee amendment proposal that closes the detailed debate. If there have been multiple discussing committees, then each will submit its own proposal. The phase of detailed debate ends with the decision of the committee closing the detailed debate. This requires its positions on each amendment proposal. Consequently, the committee submits the committee report on the detailed debate in which it provides information on the closing of the detailed debate, its findings and its positions. If the committee closes the detailed debate with an amendment proposal, then the committee must submit it together with the report.[14]
Since 2014, there is a new committee with special legal status, the Committee on Legislation, to discuss the amendment proposals of committees and to adopt positions on them and to draw up a summary amendment proposal and report. This is the fourth phase of the legislation process, and this is where the central topic of my paper, the Committee on Legislation, appears.
The purpose of establishing this committee was to set up a technical filter in addition to the general debate of the plenary sitting and the detailed debate in the committees. In the following, I will review the technical functions of this committee.
According to Paragraph (1) of Section 21/A of Act XXXVI of 2012 on the National Assembly (hereinafter referred to as National Assembly Act), the committee on legislation shall act in the course of the National Assembly's legislative activity as a committee in charge of making proposals, delivering opinions, taking decisions in the cases determined in Acts and in the provisions of the Rules of Procedure laid down in a resolution, exercising the powers specified in the Fundamental Law, in Acts, in the provisions of the Rules of Procedure laid down in a resolution and in other resolutions
- 347/348 -
of the National Assembly.[15] The National Assembly Act does not define the committee on legislation among the standing committees but as a sui generis committee body the establishment of which is, similarly to other standing committees, mandatory based on legal requirements.
In the general process of legislation, the role of the committee on legislation starts after the closing of the phase of detailed debate, as its key function is to assess the committee amendment proposals and to adopt a position on them. After the detailed debates in the committees are closed, the proposer has the opportunity to declare whether he or she supports the amendments formulated in the committees. This step gives three declaration options for the proposer. Provide written information regarding the committee amendment propos-al(s) he or she agrees with or to notify that he or she wishes to submit this information at the sitting of the committee on legislation or to disclose the information that he or she will not make any declarations. The proposer must provide the written information on the third day of the week following the closing of the phase of detailed debate at the latest. The option of non-declaration is significant because it can accelerate the process of legislation. If the proposer makes a statement regarding the position, then the restriction that the procedure of the committee on legislation may take place on the week after the phase of detailed debate at the latest applies. If he or she makes that statement (called Point C Statement based on the rule in Point (c) of Paragraph (1) of Section 46 of the HHSZ) however, this restriction does not apply, the amendment proposals may be assessed and the position may be adopted earlier as well.[16]
In the absence of a committee amendment proposal closing the detailed debate, the committee on legislation generally does not discuss the draft act. Initiation of the procedure by the proposer or the Government is, however, an exception. Such initiation should take place one hour before the opening of the sitting the agenda of which includes the final vote on the draft act at the latest. The committee on legislation can formulate further intentions for amendment as well. It summarises its own amendment proposals and the committee amendment proposal, closing the detailed debate and supported by it, in a motion which is called summary amendment proposal.[17]
The committee on legislation does not discuss the draft act if neither the proposer or the person authorised to attend in his or her place appear at the committee sitting. A representative of the Government may attend the committee sitting even if he or she is not the proposer, but the draft act affects his or her functions. The proposer and the representative of the Government may attend the committee sitting in a consultative capacity, they may speak but may not vote. The rapporteur designated by the discussing committee having submitted and discussed the committee amendment proposal closing the detailed debate may also attend the committee sitting in a consultative capacity.[18]
The committee prepares a summary report on the conclusion of the committee amendment proposals closing the detailed debate and the position adopted and submits it to the Speaker. If the committee adopted a summary amendment proposal, then it submits it with the report together. If, during its procedure, the committee finds it necessary, it may invite any committee to submit a draft act. This allows us to establish that, though standing committees are entitled to submit draft acts, the committee on legislation does not have this power.[19]
The next phase of the process of legislation involves the proposer again. After the submission of the summary amendment proposal, he or she must without delay send the chair of the committee on legislation the consolidated and countersigned text of the original draft act and the summary amendment proposal. This document is the single proposal. If, in the opinion of the chair of the committee, the draft act contains the appropriate consolidated text of the draft act and the summary amendment proposal, then he or she submits it to the Speaker. If, however, the proposer has not consolidated the two documents properly, the committee on legislation will consolidate its text and then submit the single proposal. The deadline for submitting the single proposal is one hour before the opening of the sitting the agenda of
- 348/349 -
which includes the debate on the committee report and the summary amendment proposal.[20]
After the procedure of the committee on legislation, the National Assembly debates the committee reports closing the detailed debate, the summary report and the summary amendment proposal. This phase takes place at the plenary sitting again, just like the general debate. If the committee on legislation has submitted a summary report, the debate should first hear the opinion of the committee. This is presented by the rapporteur designated by the committee, and if a minority opinion has been formulated in the committee, then the rapporteur of the minority opinion may also speak. There are fifteen minutes in total to explain the committee opinion, and this time period should be so allocated that if there is a minority opinion, than its rapporteur must get seven minutes. Their speeches are followed by those of the proposer and the Government. After that, the rapporteur designated by the designated committee may explain the position of the committee, then the committees connected to the debate may also explain their positions. For all committees, the rapporteurs of minority opinions must be given the opportunity to explain the minority opinions. Six minutes per committee should be allocated.[21]
After the speeches of the committees, members of the parliamentary groups, independent MPs, MEPs and advocates of national minorities may speak. They speak in a time frame which is regulated in detail in the Rules of Procedure of the National Assembly. Persons who attend the plenary sitting in a consultative capacity may speak as a matter of urgency during the debate. Directly after closing the debate, the proposer has the option to deliver a closing speech in which he or she can react to the other speakers.[22]
The plenary sitting then decides in a single vote on the summary amendment proposal. If the proposer has not delivered a conclusion, he or she and the representative of the Government may explain whether they agree with the summary amendment proposal in five minutes before the vote. Separate voting may be requested at this point of the process of legislation. The proposer or any of the parliamentary groups may request in writing that the National Assembly vote on a point of the summary amendment proposal separately on the last working day of the week preceding the sitting the agenda of which includes the decision making.[23]
Parliamentary groups and the proposer have a similar option, requesting sustainment. Those involved in the separate vote may, within the time limit determined in the separate vote, request the National Assembly to sustain a proposed amendment not included in the summary amendment proposal. The number of separate votes and requests for sustainment may be three per petitioners. In that case, the National Assembly votes first on the proposals to be sustained, and if it sustains a proposed amendment, then voting on the summary amendment proposal and its items concerned by the separate vote is not an option.[24]
If the amendment proposal is sustained, the draft act goes back to the committee on legislation. After the decision, the committee has three days to prepare the second summary amendment proposal which is the consolidated text of the sustained amendment proposal and the summary amendment proposal. In that case, the committee may change the text of the sustained amendment proposal or may formulate further intentions for amendment only if it is by all means necessary in order to meet the requirements laid down in the Rules of Procedure of the National Assembly. The committee submits a second summary report on the conclusion of the discussion of the sustained amendment proposal, concurrently with the submission of the second summary amendment proposal. The consolidated text of the draft act and the second summary amendment proposal (second single proposal) must be submitted according to the rules pertaining to the single proposal.[25]
The case where adoption of certain parts of the draft act requires a qualified majority is more problematic. In that case, provisions requiring simple majority and the provisions requiring qualified majority must be separat-
- 349/350 -
ed and subject to separate votes. The vote on the sustainment of the amendment proposal, the items for which separate vote(s) were requested and the summary amendment proposal must have two stages, and the items requiring qualified majority need to be voted on first. No vote on the original text of the draft act is required after the vote on the provisions concerned by the amendment.[26]
The National Assembly re-debates the second summary amendment proposal, the difference in this case is that the discussing committee does not designate a rapporteur. As a general rule, the National Assembly decides on the second summary amendment proposal in a single vote. There are, however, two exceptions. Both the proposer and the leader of any of the parliamentary groups may request separate voting; the number of the items regarding which separate votes may be requested is, however, limited. Three items of the second summary amendment proposal may be subject to vote. The second case is when the plenary sitting does not vote at the same time, but on the amendment proposal requiring qualified majority.[27]
The final vote is the last phase of legislation before the plenary sitting. The National Assembly decides on the final text of the act based on the recommendation of the committee on legislation. The general rule is that the National Assembly cannot adopt a position different from the intentions for amendment formulated by the committee on legislation, it must decide whether it supports or rejects the summary amendment proposal in conjunction with it. The committee on legislation does, therefore, have great responsibility in the development of the final text of the act, it must ensure coherence among the various amendment proposals and must consolidate all intentions for amendment it supports and ensure the clarification indispensable for the coherence of the amendment proposals with different subject-matters.
After the adoption of the summary amendment proposal, the plenary sitting decides on the single proposal. Again, if the final vote is about provisions requiring qualified majority, then these should first be voted on and the provisions only requiring simple majority should be voted on afterwards. The plenary sitting decides on the text of the submitted draft act in the following cases: if no amendment proposal closing the detailed debate has been submitted; if the committee on legislation has not submitted a summary amendment proposal, or if it has not approved of the summary or the second summary amendment proposal. The final vote is on the second single proposal if the National Assembly has adopted the second summary amendment proposal. The National Assembly has the final vote on the text of the draft act as amended with the accepted points of the summary amendment proposal if the plenary sitting has not approved of any of the points of the summary amendment proposal at the separate vote. The National Assembly has the final vote on the accepted point of the second summary amendment proposal of the draft act if it has not voted in favour of any of the points of the second summary amendment proposal at the separate vote.[28]
Again, the final vote is also subject to the rule that if a qualified majority decision is required, then the final vote should be split in two where the qualified majority decision should be made first. If no qualified majority decision is reached at the sitting, then the chair of the sitting must order a break in the discussion.[29]
"Any nation that wants to be viewed as positive must establish its legal system in a way that it is right and valuable for the general human idea." The current chair of the Committee on Legislation greets the visitor with this thought of Gábor Vladár, former minister of justice, on the website of the Committee on Legislation. This quotation expresses the main reason for setting up the Committee as well as its main task, as the goal to establish the Committee on Legislation was to ensure a professional filter in the process of legislation. The Committee, defined in the greeting of the chair as the guardian of legislation, was established in 2014. The Hungarian National Assembly adopted the resolution on certain provisions of the Rules of Procedure on 13 February 2014, and it replaced the one in force since 1994. The main purpose to lay down the new rules of procedure was
- 350/351 -
to separate the political and professional debates on draft acts. The underlying idea of the legislator was to have political debates in the plenary sitting general debate on draft acts and to have professional debates in the detailed debate phase in committees.
The idea of setting up the Committee on Legislation appears in legislative proposal No. T/13254 on Act XXXVI of 2012 on the National Assembly and the amendment of other acts related to it. The proposal was submitted by six ruling-party MPs on 3 December 2013 (Antal Rogán, Gergely Gulyás, András Cser-Palkovics, Péter Harrach, Bence Rétvári and György Rubovszky). The proposal added the following Subchapter 7/A to the National Assembly Act, which virtually meant the establishment of the Committee on Legislation.
Section 21/A. (1) The committee on legislation shall act in the course of the National Assembly's legislative activity as a committee in charge of making proposals, delivering opinions, taking decisions in the cases determined in Acts and in the provisions of the Rules of Procedure laid down in a resolution, exercising the powers specified in the Fundamental Law, in Acts, in the provisions of the Rules of Procedure laid down in a resolution and in other resolutions of the National Assembly.
(2) The National Assembly shall upon its formation establish the committee on legislation. The National Assembly shall decide on the persons of the deputy chair and the members of the committee on legislation at the same time of establishing the standing committees.
(3) The provisions of Section 15(4), Section 17(1) to (2), Sections 18 to 20 and Section 21(1) and (3) shall apply to the committee on legislation with the proviso that the mandate of the chair of the committee on legislation shall also terminate if his or her mandate as the Deputy Speaker responsible for legislation terminates on the basis of Section 10(1)d).
The reasoning of the proposal lays down that the new committee to be established will have a priority role among the other committees and have general responsibility in the course of legislation. This explains that its chair outranks the chairs of the other committees and has the rank of deputy speakers, as the National Assembly also elects a deputy speaker responsible for legislation. The text of the legislative proposal was adopted as amended with the following sentence in its Paragraph (2): "The National Assembly shall take a separate decision on the person of the chair of the committee on legislation."[30] The Committee has had two chairs since it was established: Gergely Gulyás, and the current chair, Csaba Hende. Whereas the chair has the same rank as the deputy speakers, they were elected at the same time when the other deputy speakers were elected in plenary sitting. This is at the constitutive sitting, after the Speaker is elected by secret ballot. At the joint motion of the leaders of the parliamentary groups and based on the proposal of the chair of age, the deputy speakers and the parliamentary notaries by open ballot. No amendment proposals may be submitted to this proposal. The plenary sitting makes separate decisions on each officer without debate, then the chair of age announces the results (the newly elected Speaker is still not chairing the sitting at this moment). If the majority necessary for the election of the Speaker has not been reached, a repeated vote shall be held at the constitutive sitting with regard to that office. If there were more candidates for the office of the Speaker, in the repeated vote votes may be cast for the two candidates who have received the highest number of votes. If also the repeated vote is inconclusive, a new nomination and a new vote shall be held for the unfilled office.[31]
In practice, three deputy speakers responsible for legislation have so far been elected in plenary sitting: at the constitutive sittings of 2014 and 2018, and there was a midterm election as well. As there are only three examples for this election, I now briefly describe the process of the vote. The constitutive sitting of the 2014-2018 parliamentary term was chaired by Béla Turi-Kovács as chair of age, and he moved, based on the joint motion of the leaders of the parliamentary groups, in his Proposal No. S/3, that the National Assembly elects 6 Deputy Speakers, including a deputy speaker responsible for legislation, and 10 parliamentary notaries. The chair of age subsequently
- 351/352 -
disclosed the nominees for the offices of deputy speakers and parliamentary notaries to the MPs, the plenary sitting then held an open ballot without debate on each of them separately. The motion nominated dr. Gergely Gulyás as deputy speaker for legislation, and the MPs elected him with 192 votes in favour, 2 votes against and 1 abstention. Concurrently with his being elected as deputy speaker, he also became a candidate for the office of chair of the committee on legislation.[32]
The committee on legislation is also established at the constitutive sitting. The sitting was chaired by László Kövér, newly elected Speaker, at this time. Proposal for Resolution No. H/5 on the Establishment of Parliamentary Committees and the Election of their Officers and Members contains the proposal regarding the committee system, made by the participants in the preparation of the constitutive sitting. This proposal is submitted by the Speaker. The Speaker proposed persons the leaders of the parliamentary groups agreed on, having taken the opinions of independent MPs also into consideration. As, by virtue of the National Assembly Act, the chair of the committee on legislation is decided separately by the National Assembly, the plenary sitting had to first vote on the committee system, the committee officers and members and the chair was elected only afterwards. After the National Assembly established the committee system with 185 votes in favour, i.e. unanimously, the chair of the committee on legislation was also elected. The National Assembly elected Gergely Gulyás chair of the committee on legislation with 185 votes in favour, 1 vote against and 1 abstention. Establishment of the first committee on legislation was done with this.[33]
The position of chair of the first committee on legislation established in 2014 became vacant due to resignation. On 2 October 2017, having regard to his mandate as leader of his parliamentary group, Gergely Gulyás resigned from his positions of deputy speaker responsible for legislation and chair of the committee on legislation. In Proposal No. S/17643., submitted within the powers of Speaker, the Speaker moved that the National Assembly elected Csaba Hende deputy speaker responsible for legislation instead of Gergely Gulyás.
The plenary sitting adopted the proposal with 150 votes in favour, 2 votes against and 0 abstentions. This made Csaba Hende a candidate for the position of chair of the committee on legislation, and the National Assembly elected him chair of the committee on legislation with 152 votes in favour, 1 vote against and 0 abstentions.
With its 39 members, the committee on legislation is the largest committee of the National Assembly. Its chair is Csaba Hende, an MP of the ruling party, four of its deputy chairs are FIDESZ MPs (dr. István Bajkai, György Balla, dr. László Salacz, László Vécsey), one of them is an MP of Jobbik (Mrs. Lóránt Hegedűs) and one is an MP of the Hungarian Socialist Party (dr. Tamás Harangozó). Besides them, the committee had 16 FIDESZ members, 2 KDNP members, 4 Jobbik members, 3 MSZP members, 2 DK members, 1 LMP member and 1 Párbeszéd member on the day of the constitutive sitting. The committee on legislation became the current 39-member body with subsequently elected additional MPs.
According to Paragraph (1) of Section 107 of the HHSz, committees shall establish their operational order taking into account the provisions of the Rules of Procedure. The current procedural rules of the committee on legislation has been in force since 16 October 2018. I explain this in the following.
Pursuant to Resolution No. 5/2018. (V. 8.), the committee has 39 members: the chair, the 6 deputy chairs and 32 members. The chair and the deputy chairs are the officers of the committee. The chair has the following responsibilities: representation of the committee, preparation and convocation of the committee, chairing its sittings. Although committees may generally not be in sitting during sittings, if documents requiring discussion so necessitate, he or she is to request the approval of the Speaker to the committee's being in session during the sitting of the National Assembly. Minutes of the sittings are attested by the chair's signature. He or she authorises the disclosure of documents either in the committee courier service or at the
- 352/353 -
committee sitting and exercises his or her disciplinary powers specified in the National Assembly Act. He or she may request funding for the expenses incurred in relation to committee activities from the director of the Office of the Hungarian National Assembly. He or she also decides-either within the scope of his or her own competence or after informing the committee and the adoption of its decision-on the fulfilment or rejection of the submissions, enquiries, requests and invitations received by the committee. The chair decides on the order of his or her substitution by the deputy chairs in the event of his or her being prevented.[34]
Sittings of the committee on legislation are chaired by the chair, or in the event of his or her being prevented, a deputy chair. If the sittings does not have a quorum, then he or she may postpone the establishment of the agenda for the time necessary for having a quorum. The committee, as it is, may not be in sitting without an accepted agenda. If the chair or the deputy chair has postponed the opening of the sitting, he or she attempts to ensure a quorum. This is done by calling the attention of the members belonging to their parliamentary groups to ensure a quorum. If a quorum is impossible, the chair convokes the sitting of the committee to the earliest date at which a quorum may be ensured. If there is an already approved agenda but there is still no quorum, the committee will continue its sitting and discuss the agenda items that only require the ability to hold a discussion. If there is no such agenda item, then the chair closes the committee sitting.[35]
When the agenda is determined, attention should be paid to allowing sufficient time for elaborating the amendment proposals submitted by the committee and deciding on the amendment proposals of the committee. If the amendment proposal of the committee is expected to amend the draft act to a considerable extent, then, if the chair or the committee so decides, the committee may decide on the submission of the summary amendment proposal in a separate sitting. In practice, this mostly happens with major draft acts on taxation or draft acts on the government budget.
In determining the agenda, the committee first decides on the motions to amend the proposed agenda, and one committee member from each parliamentary group may take the floor before the vote.[36]
The chair chairs the committee sitting impartially and ensures compliance with the order of the discussion. This means that it is the chair who opens, chairs and then closes the sitting, allows members to take the floor, ensures compliance with the provisions of the Rules of Procedure and the order of the discussion and announces the results of votes. After opening the sitting, the chair announces if any of the committee members are substituted by naming the substituting member. To this end, the designation of a substitute shall be presented to the chair not later than at the time of the commencement of the substitution.[37]
In discussing the agenda items, any committee member may move that the committee restricts the duration of oral contributions to the same time by each parliamentary group or by each member of the committee. Each member may also move that the committee orders the connected discussion of several amendment proposals. Should this be the case, the vote shall be held accordingly, except if any committee member has requested a separate vote on one or more amendment proposals.[38]
The committee on legislation discusses two types of amendment proposals: the amendment proposals submitted by the standing committees and closing the detailed debate and proposed texts recommended to the committee on legislation for discussion and adoption as its own motion for amendment (hereinafter referred to as intention for amendment). The procedural rules regulate the proposal for discussing and adopting the intention for amendment as follows. The committee on legislation shall only discuss amendment proposals referred to the committee for adoption if the proposer submits the text of such an amendment proposal to the committee secretariat before the end of normal working hours on the working day preceding the committee sitting. Depending on the number of draft acts on the agenda, this time limit may also be different. If the draft agenda of the committee's sitting has at least ten draft acts, then the deadline is 02:00 PM on the preceding working day. If it has at least fifteen proposals, then the deadline for submission to the secretariat is 12:00 AM
- 353/354 -
on the preceding working day.[39] The chair of the committee sends the proposals to the other committee members on the day preceding the session.[40]
As intentions for amendment must, according to the foregoing, be submitted to the committee secretariat, they are not included in the records (this means that they are not uploaded to the website of the National Assembly). This is why it is the committee that ensures the publicity of these proposals by making them publicly available on the website of the committee on legislation. It must, however, be stressed that the intentions for amendment are the proposals of the members having initiated them, i.e. they do not reflect the position of the committee on legislation. The committee will still discuss them and if it supports them, it will submit them to the National Assembly as included in the summary amendment proposal. With a view to transparency, the committee decided to attach any material subject to discussion (including own intentions) to the minutes at its sitting on 10 May 2018.
Following the order of the discussion, the procedural rules of the committee on legislation lay down the rules on decision-making. Unless provided for otherwise by the Rules of Procedure, decisions falling within the scope of its responsibilities and competence of the committee require simple majority to carry. The committee generally submits its summary report on the day preceding the deadline specified in the Rules of Procedure at the latest, except if the submission described in the foregoing failed, but any further delay in the submission would entail such a delay in the final vote that it would jeopardise or render impossible the entry into force of the act within the right time limit. Should this be the case, the summary report may be submitted 2 hours before the deadline specified in the Rules of Procedure.[41]
In the following cases, the committee appoints a rapporteur to explain its position at the sitting of the National Assembly.
- debates on the committee reports and the summary amendment proposal (if a summary report has been submitted),
- debates on the amendment proposal, preceding the final vote,
- consolidated debates in the course of exceptional procedures,
- speeches preceding decisions on the compliance of expanding proposal for amendment,
- discussions of proposals for normative review in plenary sitting,
- discussions of act sent back for reconsideration, and
- discussions of acts sent back due to its provisions inconsistent with the Fundamental Law of Hungary.[42]
If there is a minority opinion (or there are minority opinions) in the committee, then minority members may announce that they will submit a minority opinion. Should this happen, they elect a minority rapporteur among themselves, and he or she is to present the minority position at the plenary sitting.[43]
Members may use objects, images or audio records to illustrate their presentation at the committee sitting. To do that, however, they are required to submit a request to the committee chair one hour before the sitting begins at the latest. The committee decides on approving the illustration based on the proposal of the chair. If such illustration takes place without the submission of a request or the approval of the committee, then the approval shall be regarded as granted, as long as any member objects to such illustration.[44]
Members are generally required to personally attend committee sittings; however, as mentioned above, substitution is an option. If the substitution is for the entire sitting, the chair announces the substitution by naming the substituting member after opening the sitting. If the substitution is for a certain part of the sitting only, then the chair announces the substitution when it takes place. If the member having designated the substitute appears at the sitting and attends it in person, then the chair shall notice this and announce the end of the substitution at the sitting.[45]
If a person attending the committee sitting in a consultative capacity has notified the chair of his or her intention to speak in advance, the chair announces his or her name when the committee starts to discuss the relevant agenda item. If the proposer of the draft act or his or her substitute is not present at the sitting of the
- 354/355 -
committee on legislation, the committee will not discuss the draft act. The chair may order a maximum 30-minute break in the discussion in order to secure the presence of the proposer or his or her substitute. If the proposer or his or her substitute fails to attend the second committee sitting the draft agenda of which includes the draft act as well as if this person fails to make a meaningful statement regarding the questions concerning the submission, then the chair will notify the Speaker.[46]
Sittings of the committee on legislation are generally public; the chair has, however, the right to determine the size of the audience. Four seats in the audience must be provided for the non-governmental organisations and individuals who request the chair to let them attend the sitting in person. Each non-governmental organisation may have two seats. The chair guarantees such attendance on the seats provided for this purpose in a first-come-first-served system. Experts of each parliamentary group have four seats; Government experts have four seats and the expert delegated by an independent member has one seat.[47]
As written above, the chair attests the minutes of committee sittings by signing them. The deadline for preparing the working version of the verbatim minutes is the working day following the sitting. After attestation, the secretariat informs committee members and individuals having spoken at the sitting that they may submit requests for rectification of the content of the minutes via email. This is called displaying. Any committee member may move to attach the documents discussed or related to the discussion to the minutes. The committee, or the chair individually, decides on the attachment of the document to the minutes.[48]
The chair may take the actions in Sections 46-47, Paragraphs (1) and (2) of Section 48 and Paragraphs (1) to (3) of Section 49 of the National Assembly Act to ensure a smooth committee sitting. Accordingly, the chair of the sitting calls the speaker who, in his or her speech, obviously deters from the subject or unnecessarily repeats his or her own speech or the speech of somebody else during the same debate to get back to the subject and warns him or her of the consequences of non-compliance with his or her call. The chair may withdraw the right to speak from the MP who continues to act as described above even despite the second call. The chair may also withdraw the right to speak from a speaker who has used up his or her own time frame or that of his or her parliamentary group during his or her speech.[49]
The chair of the sitting shall reprimand the speaker who, in the course of his or her speech, uses an indecent term or a term offending the reputation of the National Assembly or any person or group and shall warn him or her at the same time of the consequences of the repeated use of the offensive or indecent term. The chair of the sitting shall withdraw the right to speak from the speaker who uses an offensive or indecent term repeatedly after being reprimanded. The chair of the sitting may without call and warning withdraw the right to speak from the speaker who takes objection to the decision or the conducting of the sitting by the chair of the sitting. The speaker, whose right to speak has been withdrawn by the chair of the sitting without calling and warning, may ask the committee responsible for the interpretation of the provisions of the Rules of Procedure to take an ad hoc position. The person whose right to speak has been withdrawn shall not have the floor again in the course of discussing the same item on the orders of the day.[50]
If an MP, during his or her speech at the committee sitting, uses a term that ostentatiously damages the reputation of the National Assembly or offends a person or group or the term used by him or her causes serious disturbance, the committee may move to exclude the MP from the remaining part of the committee sitting and to launch a procedure to reduce the remuneration payable to the MP at the House Committee within fifteen days as from the attestation of the minutes of the committee sitting. Such motions must specify the reason for the action and the violated provision of the Rules of Procedure Similar actions may be taken if the MP behaves in a way that severely damages the reputation and order of the National Assembly or infringes by his or her conduct the provisions of the Rules of Procedure pertaining to the order of discussions, the vote or demonstration.[51]
The MP's use of violence or threat of or calling to violence at the committee sitting is
- 355/356 -
a more serious case. Should this happen, the committee may request the House Committee to suspend the exercising of the rights of that MP and to launch the procedure to reduce the remuneration payable to him or her. The chair immediately informs the Speaker of the committee's proposal concerning the suspension of the exercising of the rights of that MP or the reduction of the remuneration payable to him or her. If any disturbance at the sitting renders the continuation of the discussion impossible, the chair orders a break in the discussion or closes the sitting.[52]
The committee is supported by its secretariat which is controlled by the chair of the committee. In organisational terms, the secretariat of the committee on legislation belongs to the Codification Department. The secretariat performs the tasks of the committee on legislation that arise from its responsibilities and competence and the procedural rules of the committee. This means that it prepares the procedures of the committee, comments upon the intentions for amendment proposed for committee discussion and not included in the background material for discussion, checks the single draft proposals sent by proposers and prepares the subsidiary motions to be submitted by the committee.
To provide a more comprehensive picture of the activities of the committee on legislation, I also present its activities during the 2014-2018 parliamentary term. In the previous parliamentary term, the National Assembly adopted 730 acts in total, 221 of which are new ones and 509 are amendments. The plenary sitting also adopted 101 National Assembly resolutions. The newly established committee on legislation had 122 sittings in total during the previous parliamentary term and it discussed 489 draft acts and 27 proposals for resolution. Committee members submitted a total of 450 own intentions for amendment of the draft acts discussed.
In each year of the previous parliamentary term, their numbers were as follows. In 2014, after the constitutive sitting, the National Assembly adopted 122 decisions (44 new acts, 53 amendments and 25 National Assembly resolutions).[53] From that the committee on legislation discussed 56 draft acts and 1 proposal for resolution to which it received 76 own intentions for amendment. The committee on legislation had 26 sittings in 2014. In 2015, the National Assembly adopted 67 new acts, 163 amendments (230 acts in total) and 46 resolutions. From that the committee on legislation discussed 163 draft acts and 8 proposals for resolution at its 43 sittings. The committee on legislation had 144 own intentions for amendment in 2015.
In 2016, 54 new acts, 137 amendments (191 acts in total) and 24 National Assembly resolutions were adopted. The committee on legislation discussed a total of 153 documents, 144 of which were draft acts and 9 were proposals for decision. Committee members submitted a total of 139 intentions for amendment to the discussed documents. In 2017, the committee on legislation had less proposals to discuss than in the preceding years, although the plenary sitting discussed and adopted more proposals. The National Assembly adopted 56 new acts, 152 amendments (208 in total) and 24 resolutions. From that, the committee on legislation discussed 128 in total (120 draft acts and 8 proposals for resolution), to which 90 own intentions for amendment were submitted. In 2018, before the elections, the National Assembly adopted 4 acts and 2 resolutions. During this short period, the committee on legislation discussed 6 draft acts and 1 proposal for resolution, and only 1 intention for amendment was received by the committee.
The committee on legislation had 122 sittings in the previous parliamentary term. The number of sittings in each year was as follows. 26 in 2014, 43 in 2015, 27 in 2016, 24 in 2018, while it had only 2 sittings in the last year of the 2014-2018 parliamentary term. The combined duration of the 122 sittings was 153 hours and 20 minutes. Compared to the other committees, the committee on legislation had the most sittings during the previous parliamentary term. Regarding the combined duration of its sittings, only the Committee on Justice comes before it with its 179 hours and 50 minutes.
The number of proposals discussed by the committee under Point (c) of Paragraph (1) of Section 46 is also interesting. As mentioned above, the proposer provides in that case written information regarding his or her not mak-
- 356/357 -
ing a statement on the committee amendment proposal closing the detailed debate. This can accelerate the process of legislation; its importance, therefore, justifies discussing it. There was a total of 186 Point C procedures in the 2014-2018 parliamentary term, which meant 179 draft acts and 7 proposals for resolution. This implies that the committee on legislation did not make a proposer's statement for more than 30 percent of the discussed 516 proposals. The number of Point C cases in each year was as follows. The proposer did not make a statement for 21 draft acts and 1 proposal for resolution in 2014, 57 draft acts and 1 proposal for resolution in 2015, 50 draft acts and 3 proposals for resolution in 2016, 51 draft acts and 2 proposals for resolution in 2017.
Own intentions for amendment came from the committee members delegated by the ruling party in most of the cases. In the previous parliamentary term, only 57 of the 450 own intentions for amendment came from committee members delegated by the opposition.[54] In 2015, 10 own intentions for amendment were submitted by the Socialist Party, 5 were submitted by Jobbik and 1 was submitted by an independent MP. In 2016, 18 intentions for amendment were submitted by the Socialist Party, 10 were submitted by Jobbik, 1 was submitted by LMP. In 2017, 5 intentions for amendment were submitted by the Socialist Party, and 3 were submitted by LMP and Jobbik each.
Since the constitutive sitting on 7 May 2018, the committee on legislation had 17 sittings at which it discussed 81 draft acts and 3 proposals for resolution. Committee members submitted a total of 70 own intentions for amendment to 56 draft acts among them. 3 were submitted by the Socialist Party, 2 were submitted by Jobbik, 1 by DK, i.e. 64 were submitted by committee members delegated by the ruling parties. This also shows that own intentions for amendment were submitted by MPs of the ruling parties in an outstandingly high number.
When it was established, the committee on legislation was envisaged to ensure constitutionality and coherence; practice, however, shows that the committee decides in policy issues as well. This raises the question whether the establishment of the committee on legislation rendered the phase of detailed debate obsolete and a less significant step in the process of legislation. Studying the own intentions for amendment submitted since the 2018 constitutive sitting allows the conclusion that a considerable portion of the amending points (almost half of them) is about meaningful change. The proposals submitted by opposition MPs always expect the committee to meaningfully amend the document at hand. The next major group of the amending points are about legally technical changes as well as often about codification or grammar/spelling errors.[55] On average, one intention for amendment is submitted to each draft act (one intention for amendment per draft act was submitted to the 47 draft acts out of the 56 draft acts discussed in this parliamentary term, the rest received 2 to 5).
The number of amending points suggested in the own intentions for amendment submitted is far from being constant. Taking a closer look at the 70 intentions for amendment, we can see that 31 had amending points between 1 and 5, 20 had them between 6 and 10 and 9 had them 11 and 20. Only a relatively small number of intentions for amendment had amending points more than that. 3 had them between 21 and 30, 2 had them between 31 and 40 and 5 had more than 40. Almost all the intentions for amendment submitted by opposition MPs had a low number of amending points and they were always meant to achieve substantive change.
My paper presented the establishment, structure and work of the committee on legislation established in 2014 and the current regulations concerning the process of legislation. We can conclude that Hungary created a unique legal institution even at European level; its general responsibilities, competence and conclusive powers make this committee stand above the other committees.
The above allows the conclusion that the committee on legislation has become a key player in the process of legislation. As the phase of detailed debate in the committees is not the last step acts need to take to get before the National Assembly, the government does
- 357/358 -
not develop a final position in quite a few instances because amendments are still possible in the procedure of the committee on legislation. Another significant element of the process is that the amendments formulated by the committees are reviewed again and then decided upon by the committee on legislation. Amendments formulated by the committees need, therefore, to be adopted by the committee on legislation to get to the plenary sitting. If, however, a new amendment proposal is submitted at the sitting of the committee on legislation, then it will surely get to the plenary sitting after its adoption. The specificity of the committee on legislation lies, therefore, in the fact that it may review the amendment proposals of the committees conducting the detailed debate and may decide on them without informing the plenary sitting as well as formulate its own amendment proposals. This allows the conclusion that the significance of the committee on legislation lies in the fact that it decides what gets before the plenary sitting, which intentions for amendment get on the desks of MPs to vote on. The bottom line is that it is a filter in the process of legislation. It selects the proposals worthy of getting to the plenary sitting, which greatly affects the process of legislation.
We can also conclude that the committee on legislation deals with policy issues in quite a few instances (most cases concern Point C procedures where the proposer has less time to develop amendments), although these should be discussed in the relevant committees.[56] Although the HHSz does not exclude the possibility that the committee adopts substantive amendments as its own intention; this trend is, however, not in line with the purpose of establishing the committee on legislation. It also happened in quite a few instances that the committee on legislation corrected, clarified the amendment proposals adopted by the relevant committees according to the position of the respective proposer. The question whether the committee on legislation renders the work of other committees obsolete and reduces the activities of other committees' members is a substantive one.[57] The mutual strengthening of the committee on legislation and the other committees-where the other committees have a meaningful function and the committee on legislation only deals with constitutionality-is a problem for the future. ■
NOTES
[1] This paper has been made within the framework of the programmes initiated by the Hungarian Ministry of Justice to raise the standard of legal education.
[2] Reference to the interview made with dr. Imre PAPP, a tutor of the Department of Constitutional Law of the Eötvös Loránd University (https://arsboni.hu/interjupappimre/)
[3] István Soltész (2018): Az Országgyűlés [The Hungarian National Assembly]. Manuscript. Office of the Hungarian National Assembly, Budapest. p. 26
[4] József Petrétei - Péter Tilk: Magyarország alkotmányjogának alapjai. [The Fundaments of the Constitutional Law of Hungary.] Kodifikátor Alapítvány [Kodifikátor Foundation], Pécs, 2014. p. 125
[5] Soltész i.m.: p. 27 (table)
[6] Dr. Pál Gonda: A javaslatok plenáris tárgyalása (In. A plenáris ülés (1. rész) [Discussion of proposals at the plenary sitting (In. The Plenary Sitting (Part 1.)]. (editor: dr. István SOLTÉSZ). Office of Methodology of the Hungarian Parliament, Budapest, 1997. p. 37.
[7] Sections 29-30 of Decision No. 10/2014. (II. 24.) of the Hungarian National Assembly (hereinafter referred to as HHSz)
[8] Paragraph (2) of Section 31 of the HHSz.
[10] Section 59 of the HHSz.
[11] Section 32 of the HHSz.
[12] Section 34 of the HHSz.
[13] Paragraph (3) of Section 45 of the HHSz.
[14] Section 45 of the HHSz.
[15] Section 21/A of the National Assembly Act
[16] Paragraph (1) of Section 46 of the HHSz.
[17] Paragraphs (4)-(5) of Section 46 of the HHSz
[18] Paragraph (6) of Section 46 of the HHSz.
[19] Paragraphs (7)-(9) of Section 46 of the HHSz
[20] Paragraphs (10)-(12) of Section 46 of the HHSz
[21] Paragraphs (1)-(4) of Section 47 of the HHSz
[22] Paragraphs (5)-(11) of Section 47 of the HHSz
[23] Paragraphs (1)-(2) of Section 48 of the HHSz
[24] Paragraphs (4)-(6) of Section 48 of the HHSz
[25] Paragraph (7) of Section 48 of the HHSz
[26] Paragraphs (8)-(9) of Section 48 of the HHSz
[27] Section 49 of the HHSz.
[28] Paragraphs (1)-(2) of Section 50 of the HHSz
[29] Paragraph (3) of Section 50 of the HHSz
[30] Paragraph (2) of Section 21/A of the National Assembly Act
[31] Section 6 of the National Assembly Act
[32] Parliamentary Journal, vol. 1. (2014-2018 parliamentary term) pp. 30-31.
[33] Parliamentary Journal, vol. 1. (2014-2018 parliamentary term) pp. 36-37.
[34] Points 1 to 4 of the procedural rules of the committee on legislation.
[35] Points 6 to 10 of the procedural rules of the committee on legislation.
[36] Points 11 to 13 of the procedural rules of the committee on legislation
[37] Section 113 of the HHSz.
[38] Point 15 of the procedural rules of the committee on legislation
- 358/359 -
[39] The committee adopted the new procedural rules making the deadline for the submission of own intentions depending on the number of agenda items, instead of the previously uniform 04:30 PM, at its sitting on 11 May 2017. These differentiated rules were implemented at the proposal of the chair, because practice demonstrated that committee members did not have the time required to familiarise themselves with the own intentions.
[40] Points 17 to 19 of the procedural rules of the committee on legislation
[41] Points 20 to 22 of the procedural rules of the committee on legislation
[42] Point 23 of the procedural rules of the committee on legislation
[43] Point 24 of the procedural rules of the committee on legislation
[44] Points 25 to 26 of the procedural rules of the committee on legislation
[45] Points 27 to 29 of the procedural rules of the committee on legislation
[46] Points 30 to 32 of the procedural rules of the committee on legislation
[47] Points 34 to 36 of the procedural rules of the committee on legislation
[48] Points 37 to 38 of the procedural rules of the committee on legislation
[49] Section 46-47 of the National Assembly Act
[50] Section 48-49 of the National Assembly Act
[51] Point 40 of the procedural rules of the committee on legislation
[52] Points 41 to 43 of the procedural rules of the committee on legislation
[53] Among the adopted acts, there are ones that the committee on legislation does not discuss, such as international treaties, the budget, etc.
[54] The website of the committee on legislation displays the intentions for amendment only from 7 May 2015, so they are counted from that date.
[55] The own intentions for amendment submitted since the constitutive sitting in 2018 had abt. 400 points concerning substantive changes, abt. 200 were legally technical, 60 concerned grammar/spelling errors, ca. 40 were about codification issues and almost 100 were mixed.
[56] Apart from the exceptional procedure, the deviation from the HHSz and acts returned, as the committee is obliged to discuss policy issues in these cases.
[57] Parlamenti jog [Parliament Law]. p. 152-153.
Lábjegyzetek:
[1] The Author is doctoral student, Faculty of Law at the University of Pécs, Legal associate of the Office of the Hungarian National Assembly.
Visszaugrás
