Hungary / District Court of Szeged
Country
Hungary
Year
Decision/ruling/judgment date
Incident(s) concerned/related
Related Bias motivation
Groups affected
Court/Body type
Court/Body
Key facts of the case
On 8 September 2015, the camerawoman of an alt-right TV channel was filming at the collection point at Röszke close to the Hungarian-Serbian border where the Police apprehended irregular migrants arriving from Serbia. Some 400 asylum seekers broke out of the collection point and started to run toward the corn fields. The camerawoman was standing in their way. When the asylum seekers started to run towards her, she kicked an adult man and a little girl in the knee, and she did not stop filming. The victims did not suffer personal injury.
Main reasoning/argumentation
The prosecutor in the criminal procedure argued that the defendant's action was a hate crime given her affiliation to the alt-right TV channel (N1 TV), and the fact that the kicking was intentional and could not qualify as self-defence. The defence attorney argued that the Police wanted to stop the victims, and when this attempt proved to be unsuccessful, the defendant practically assisted the Police to stop the asylum seekers when kicking them in the knee.
Is the case related to the application of the Framework Decision on Racism and Xenophobia, the Racial Equality Directive?
Key issues (concepts, interpretations) clarified by the case
The Court had to decide whether the affiliation of the defendant alone can be an indicator of her motive, or other circumstances are also necessary to prove the hate crime motive.
Results (sanctions, outcome) and key consequences or implications of the case
The Court found the defendant guilty of vandalism, and sentenced her to a 3-year long probation. The Court emphasised the defendant's racist/xenophobic motive could not have been proven given that her actions targeted asylum seekers who were subjects to unsuccessful police apprehension. The Court stressed the defendant's act was in fact violent and against moral standards, however, it did not cause personal injury to the victims.
Key quotation in original language and its unofficial translation into English with reference details
The decision has not been published yet, only a press release of the Court is available.