Hungary under Viktor Orbán: electoral democracy or electoral autocracy?

Bc. Michal NAVRÁTIL

Master's thesis

Abstract:

This thesis examines the nature of the political regime in Hungary under Viktor Orbán, with the research question of whether the country can still be classified as an electoral democracy or whether it has already become an electoral autocracy. Based on the theoretical frameworks of procedural democracy, electoral democracy, and hybrid regimes, particularly the concepts of electoral autocracy and competitive authoritarianism. The thesis provides an empirical assessment of parliamentary elections held in 2014, 2018, and 2022. The analysis is conducted through a diachronic comparison focusing on six key areas: political context, political parties, the electoral process, access to media, campaign financing, and election results. Drawing on reports by Freedom House, OSCE/ODIHR, and data from V-Dem indices, the research investigates the extent to which these elections met the minimum standards of democratic legitimacy. Special attention is paid to the erosion of a level playing field, resulting from media capture, biased allocation of public resources, electoral rule changes, and institutional weakening. Although Hungary continues to conduct regular, formally pluralistic elections, the findings indicate a substantial distortion of electoral competition. The structural advantages enjoyed by the ruling Fidesz-KDNP coalition, coupled with declining institutional safeguards, raise serious doubts about the authenticity of democratic procedures. The thesis concludes that Hungary no longer satisfies the criteria of electoral democracy and increasingly exhibits the characteristics of an electoral autocracy.

Abstract:

This thesis examines the nature of the political regime in Hungary under Viktor Orbán, with the research question of whether the country can still be classified as an electoral democracy or whether it has already become an electoral autocracy. Based on the theoretical frameworks of procedural democracy, electoral democracy, and hybrid regimes, particularly the concepts of electoral autocracy and competitive authoritarianism. The thesis provides an empirical assessment of parliamentary elections held in 2014, 2018, and 2022. The analysis is conducted through a diachronic comparison focusing on six key areas: political context, political parties, the electoral process, access to media, campaign financing, and election results. Drawing on reports by Freedom House, OSCE/ODIHR, and data from V-Dem indices, the research investigates the extent to which these elections met the minimum standards of democratic legitimacy. Special attention is paid to the erosion of a level playing field, resulting from media capture, biased allocation of public resources, electoral rule changes, and institutional weakening. Although Hungary continues to conduct regular, formally pluralistic elections, the findings indicate a substantial distortion of electoral competition. The structural advantages enjoyed by the ruling Fidesz-KDNP coalition, coupled with declining institutional safeguards, raise serious doubts about the authenticity of democratic procedures. The thesis concludes that Hungary no longer satisfies the criteria of electoral democracy and increasingly exhibits the characteristics of an electoral autocracy.

Keywords

Hungary, Viktor Orbán, electoral democracy, electoral autocracy, level playing field, parliamentary elections in Hungary 2014, 2018, 2022

Language used: English

Date on which the thesis was submitted / produced: 31. 7. 2025

Thesis defence

• Supervisor: Mgr. Petra Měšťánková, Ph.D.

Palacký University Olomouc

Faculty of Law

Master programme / field:
European Law and EU Policies / European Law and EU Policies