recent translations summaries

In its decision announced in public, the Constitutional Court found that the Parliament had caused a conflict with the Fundamental Law by omission, due to failing to regulate, in the course of amending the Act on Scientific Research, Development and Innovation and the Act on the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, the property relations between the Eötvös Loránd Research Network and the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, the former operator of the research network, in accordance with the principles of legal certainty and the enforcement of right to property. Therefore, the Constitutional Court called upon the Parliament to meet its related legislative duty by 30 June 2023. Acting ex officio, regarding the provisions regulated in section 45 to 46 of the Act LXXVI of 2014 on Scientific Research, Development and Innovation as amended by the Act LXVIII of 2019 and section 3 (1a) of the Act XL of 1994 on the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, the Constitutional Court found that the Parliament had caused a conflict with the Fundamental Law by omission, due to failing to regulate, in section 45 to 46 of the Act LXXVI of 2014 on Scientific Research, Development and Innovation as amended by the Act LXVIII of 2019 and section 3 (1a) of the Act XL of 1994 on the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, the property relations between the Eötvös Loránd Research Network and the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, the former operator of the research network, in accordance with the principles of legal certainty and the enforcement of right to property. In the decision, the Constitutional Court also ruled that in the context of the application of section 42/C (3) of the Act LXXVI of 2014 on Scientific Research, Development and Innovation, it is a constitutional requirement that the freedom of science prevails in the making of decisions on scientific issues, and that the method and regulation of decision-making comply with the constitutional value of scientific freedom. The procedure of the Constitutional Court was based on the posterior norm control petition of more than a quarter of the Members of Parliament and the constitutional complaint of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, in which the petitioners proposed the annulment of several sections of the Act amending certain Acts necessary for the transformation of the institutional system and financing of research, development and innovation. Research centres and institutes previously under the control of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, operated partly from the property of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and partly from budgetary source, have been placed by the law-maker under a new governance structure. According to the contested regulation, among other things, the Hungarian Academy of Sciences is responsible for ensuring the right of use of the assets owned by it and used by the research centres. In the petitioners’ view, this was a deprivation of the right of disposal of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, and the regulation unconstitutionally restricts the constitutionally protected property of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences as earmarked public property. In its decision, the Constitutional Court explained that it does not have the power to review the effectiveness of the performance of public functions in relation to a regulation, and the mere fact that the State intends to continue to perform a public function through another body does not in itself constitute an infringement of the Fundamental Law. However, it is the task of the Constitutional Court to hold the law-maker accountable for the requirements linked to the nature of the institutional system (in this case, the freedom of science and the right to property). The Constitutional Court ruled, among other things, that the allocation of the earmarked assets of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences to another body is constitutional if the scope of the assets is precisely defined, the measure is necessary and the decision is subject to judicial review. The new body that actually uses the assets not only acquires the rights to the assets, but also bears the burdens. Furthermore, the right to use public assets may be transferred only for a limited period. According to the decision, the legislation under review does not contain these constitutional requirements, but the Constitutional Court does not have the power to establish them. Therefore, the Constitutional Court found that the Parliament had caused a conflict with the Fundamental Law by failing to properly regulate the existing and future property relations when reorganising into a new management structure the research institutes previously operated and managed by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences as a public duty. The property of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences is earmarked non-State property, within which the property acquired by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (e.g. real estate, intangible assets) is subject to property protection under Article XIII (1) of the Fundamental Law. The State has to create a regulatory framework that provides the conditions and guarantees necessary for the performance of public tasks. The Constitutional Court otherwise rejected and refused the initiatives aimed at establishing the conflict with the Fundamental Law and annulling the contested statutory provisions.