Why experts say the cruise ship hantavirus utbreak is not another Covid

The World Health Organization has warned that more hantavirus cases could emerge after an outbreak linked to a cruise ship killed three passengers, though officials say the situation is likely to remain contained if health measures are followed.


Issued on: 08/05/2026 - RFI

A test tube labelled “hantavirus positive” and the World Health Organization logo are seen in this illustration taken on 7 May 2026. REUTERS - Dado Ruvic

The outbreak aboard the Dutch-operated MV Hondius has drawn global attention after passengers infected with the rare Andes strain of hantavirus travelled across several countries, prompting contact tracing efforts in Europe, Africa and South America.

Health experts say the virus behaves very differently from Covid-19 and is far less contagious.

WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said on Thursday that five confirmed and three suspected cases had been reported so far, including the three deaths. Because the Andes strain can incubate for up to six weeks, he warned that “more cases may be reported”.

Even so, WHO emergency alert director Abdi Rahman Mahamud said he expected “a limited outbreak” provided “public health measures are implemented and solidarity shown across all countries”


The comments came as another infected passenger landed in Europe from the ship, which is heading towards Tenerife in Spain’s Canary Islands after being refused permission to dock in Cape Verde.

WHO members reach accord 'in principle' over how to tackle future pandemics

Rare virus

Hantavirus is a rare disease usually spread by rodents and can cause severe respiratory illness, cardiac complications and haemorrhagic fever. There is no vaccine and no specific cure.

Most hantavirus strains are not transmitted between humans. The Andes strain – first identified in South America – is one of the few exceptions, though scientists say transmission requires unusually close contact.

Researchers say this is why comparisons with Covid-19 are misleading.

“It cannot be compared at all because they are not from the same viral families, they do not necessarily have the same modes of transmission, they do not have the same infection rates, and they are not equally infectious,” Anne Lavergne, head of the laboratory associated with the National Hantavirus Center at the Pasteur Institute of French Guiana, told RFI.

Lavergne said Covid-19 could spread rapidly through casual contact, whereas Andes hantavirus spreads much less efficiently.

“With Covid cases, one person could infect ten others,” she said. “With hantaviruses at their most contagious – as documented for Andes – one person can infect only two others, and even then only in very specific situations, such as close contact with patients or individuals who have developed symptoms and have very high viral loads.”

Health authorities continue to describe the overall risk of a pandemic as low despite the international nature of the outbreak.

Tracing the source

Investigators are still trying to determine where the outbreak began.

Authorities in Argentina believe a Dutch passenger contracted the virus before boarding the MV Hondius in Ushuaia on 1 April. The man died aboard the vessel on 11 April. His wife later died in South Africa after also testing positive.

Argentine officials said the couple had travelled extensively across South America after arriving in Argentina in November last year, including visits to Chile and Uruguay before returning to Buenos Aires to join the cruise.

On Thursday, Argentina’s health ministry said “it is not possible to confirm the source of the infection” based on the information currently available from the countries involved.

The uncertainty has complicated efforts to identify where the original exposure took place.

Authorities consider it unlikely the couple became infected in Ushuaia because no hantavirus cases have been recorded there in three decades. Scientists are nevertheless being sent to Tierra del Fuego to retrace the couple’s movements and capture rodents for testing.

The mission will look for a “possible presence of the virus” among local rodent populations, which are the primary carriers of hantavirus.

Argentina, where the disease is endemic in some Andean regions, has also distributed 2,500 testing kits to countries involved in the outbreak response, including the Netherlands, Spain, Britain, Senegal and South Africa.

Cross-border tracking

The international dimension of the outbreak has increased concern among health authorities.

Passengers and crew from the Hondius disembarked at several locations during the voyage, including Saint Helena, where nearly 30 passengers left the ship.

WHO officials said 12 countries had been alerted that their nationals had travelled aboard the vessel.

One infected passenger flew commercially from Saint Helena to Johannesburg while symptomatic, leading South African authorities to trace 82 passengers and six crew members from the flight.

Confirmed or suspected cases are now being managed in Britain, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland and South Africa.

Oceanwide Expeditions, the company operating the ship, said there were currently no symptomatic passengers on board as it sails towards Tenerife.

Some passengers, however, have reportedly criticised what they see as exaggerated media coverage.

(with newswires)

It’s Finally Happening!

Robert Hunziker

 May 8, 2026

FacebookTwitterRedditBlueskyEmail\

Image courtesy of the Fossil Fuel Treaty.

The Santa Marta Conference – Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels – An energetic multi-nation well-organized effort to get off fossil fuels with the underlying motto: “Make Science Great Again”

This article discusses this exciting new approach to hopefully mitigate climate change as well a discussion of the steep difficulty of overcoming the “monumental challenge” already extant.

For example, it’s ironic that a major campaign to hopefully fix climate change (it’s finally happening #1) is initiated at the same moment as carbon sinks worldwide are breaking down (it’s finally happening #2), more on this frightening scenario to follow.

“The first conference on ‘transitioning away’ from fossil fuels was held in Santa Marta, Colombia, from 24-29 April saw 57 countries – representing one-third of the world’s economy – debate practical ways to move away from coal, oil and gas.” (Santa Marta: Key Outcomes from First Summit on ‘Transitioning Away’ From Fossil Fuels, Carbon Brief, April 30, 2026).

As it happens, the bloated planet can finally exhale after decades of stress and consternation and handwringing over its future following repeated failures of thirty (30) COP meetings (UN climate “Conference of the Parties”) to move the needle enough to effectively mitigate greenhouse gas emissions.

For example, after 30 years of 50,000 to 100,000 people assembling for two weeks every year to discuss the problems of climate change, principally the result of too much CO2 emitted into the atmosphere, CO2 emissions are at all-time atmospheric highs, blanketing solar radiation heat that would otherwise reflect to outer space. This abnormality relentlessly drives the world thermometer to new highs.

After all, the planet does not want to fall into the trap of one more extinction event like the horrific Permian-Triassic known as “the Great Dying” 252 million years ago when approximately 90% of all species were eliminated. It took millions of years to recover, merging into the rambunctious Jurassic Period, part of the Mesozoic Era aka: Age of Reptiles, from 252 to 66 million years but abruptly disrupted and destroyed by a 12-mile-wide asteroid that hit ground in modern-day Mexico, wiping out approximately 80% of all species, followed by the Cenozoic Era or Age of Mammals with humans emerging out of caves, eyes blinking in bright sunlight, discovering the detritus of millennia in the form of black gold, liquid and easy to light on fire, haunting humanity to this day as Jurassic vomit.

Still, the planet remains very much on edge, in fact, hesitant. The Santa Marta process is young, untested, only a vision on paper, but it holds great promise. At the opening meetings, serious discussions lifted expectations, to wit: “Ministers and envoys from across the world sat side-by-side in small meeting rooms to have open and frank conversations about the barriers they face in transitioning from fossil fuels to clean energy. This new format – devised by co-hosts Colombia and the Netherlands – was described as ‘refreshing’, ‘highly successful’ and ‘groundbreaking’ by countries attending the talks.” Ibid.

Direct Action Advocated

“The event also featured a “science pre-conference” attended by 400 global academics, which included the launch of a new science panel that will aim to provide agile and bespoke analysis to nations wanting to accelerate their transition away from fossil fuels,” Ibid.

In a departure from IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) reports, the preliminary Santa Marta synthesis report offers “very direct guidance to action.” The report lists “12 action insights”, each with “three action recommendations”. The list was cut down from a shortlist of about 40-50 insights.

According to a preliminary scientific report seen by Carbon Brief: The countries attending the fossil-fuel summit have been asked to consider “action recommendations” such as “halting all new fossil-fuel expansion” and “rejecting gas as a bridging fuel.”

The genesis for Santa Marta originated at the UN climate conference COP30 in Belém, Brazil, several months ago, when a group of 80 nations pushed for a “roadmap away from fossil fuels” for inclusion in the final text. When this failed, Colombia and the Netherlands jointly announced a summit to be held in April in Santa Marta.

For the first time in 30 years, a renegade group of countries has been able to break loose from the clutches of a well-organized, procedurally rigged COP conference designed for the benefit of minority interests, i.e., fossil fuel promoters, that have effectively minimized efforts to reduce CO2 emissions for three decades running; still at record high levels after 30 years of hollow jabbering to reduce. This breakaway by the disenchanted is significant.

Renaissance of Science

Moreover, with a sharp slap to the face of orangish American Trumpers, science is once again taking center stage. The Trump administration has pinpointed science as a victim of one of the biggest hatchet jobs to ever visit Washington, D.C.

Whereas the Santa Marta coalition is building a pedestal reaching to the sky towards a sparkling star named: Science. “Colombian environment minister Irene Vélez Torres – herself a former academic – was particularly keen to emphasize the importance of science to the conference, telling journalists: ‘We need to go back to science and base our decisions on science,” Ibid.

A total of 57 countries participated in the conference. It’s an impressive list: Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brazil, Cameroon, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, the EU, the Federated States of Micronesia, Finland, France, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Kenya, Luxembourg, Malawi, the Maldives, the Marshall Islands, México, Mongolia, the Netherlands, Nepal, Nigeria, Norway, New Zealand, Palau, Panama, Philippines, Portugal, Saint Lucia, Senegal, Singapore, Slovenia, the Solomon Islands, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tanzania, Turkey, Tuvalu, Uganda, the UK, Uruguay, Vanuatu, the Vatican and Vietnam.

On the first day, Colombian President Gustavo Petro gave a speech at the summit, telling countries: “What I see is resistance and inertia within the power structures and the economy of this archaic energy system. Today, fossil fuels bring death; undoubtedly, that form of capital could commit suicide, taking humanity and life itself. Humanity cannot allow that,” Ibid.

The Monumental Challenge – Carbon Sinks Breaking Down

Based upon numerous studies of the current rate of climate change, Santa Marta needs to hurry and execute, like yesterday. One example of many: According to a recent YaleEnvironment360 article d/d March 9, 2026: “The Earth is warming at the fastest rate on record as emissions hit new highs and critical carbon sinks break down.”

In fact, “carbon dioxide levels are at the highest point in at least 2 million years. While humans continue to pump ever greater amounts of carbon into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels, the ability of the planet to soak up our emissions is weakening. Degraded by fire and drought, forests that were once carbon sinks are now becoming sources of emissions,” Ibid.

Carbon sinks “breaking down” is an alarmingly dangerous development, turning carbon sinks into carbon sources in concert with cars, planes, trains, and industry. e.g. “African Forests Have Become a Source of Carbon Emissions,” YaleEnvironment360 d/d December 1, 2025.

But it’s even worse than that: “The alarming shift, which has happened since 2010, means all of the planet’s three main rainforest regions — the South American Amazon, Southeast Asia, and Africa — have gone from being allies in the fight against climate breakdown to being part of the problem,” Ibid.

This loss of some of the world’s biggest carbon sinks is comparable in scale to a worldwide economic disaster such as the Great Depression, but it’s even worse. And it’s insane. While economic depressions eventually run their course, is it even possible to turn back time to reverse forests back to carbon sinks, once again?

The greatest risk to the world because of this nascent breakdown of nature’s carbon sinks is a surprising takeoff of acceleration of global warming, fast and faster, feeding on itself, blindsiding society in the context of collapsing life supporting ecosystems, e.g., by the end of 2025, approximately 30% of global land was already affected by drought, nearly tripling from the 1990s and drought severity has increased by 40% (Nature, June 2025), or the domino effect triggering tipping points. The house of cards collapses.

Stating the obvious, so bloody obvious that it’s impossible to miss what’s at stake. Santa Marta needs to hurry up and turbo-charge its policy prescriptions, and then, keeping fingers crossed, pray.

Robert Hunziker lives in Los Angeles and can be reached at rlhunziker@gmail.com.

INTERVIEW

Global press freedom in 'deplorable' state, journalism federation chief tells RFI

As the International Federation of Journalists opens the 32nd world congress in its 100-year history, outgoing president Dominique Pradalié condemned the "deplorable" state of global press freedom in an interview with RFI.


Issued on: 05/05/2026 - RFI

Mourners and colleagues holding 'press' signs surround the body of Al-Jazeera Arabic journalist Ismail al-Ghoul, killed along with his cameraman Rami al-Refee in an Israeli strike on 31 July, 2024. © Omar Al-Qattaa / AFP

More than 300 delegates representing journalists’ unions and organisations around the world are gathering in Paris for the event from 4 to 7 May, hosted by the International Federation of Journalists' (IFJ).

Outgoing IFJ president Dominique Pradalié, whose mandate ends on Monday, called the congress an opportunity "to debate the major challenges facing journalism today, such as surveillance and ongoing impunity for crimes against journalists, artificial intelligence, declining workers’ rights, among many others".

On World Press Freedom day, RFI spoke with Pradalié about the urgency of raising the alarm over the dangers faced by journalists.

Dominique Pradalié: The obstacles for journalists are manifold. They range from direct, specific threats to threats against one’s family. These arrests and disappearances are not just happening in the Sahel or in Africa, they are happening all over the world.

And as president of the International Federation of Journalists, which represents some 600,000 journalists worldwide, we have sounded an alarm bell regarding the deplorable state of press freedom and the terrifying threats that haunt journalists day and night.

On 1 May, we published a global monitoring report highlighting systemic and unprecedented surveillance targeting journalists. As well as traditional phishing emails, fake websites now coexist with state-sponsored spyware, compromising the safety of journalists and the protection of their sources, without any meaningful or active legislative or regulatory oversight. And what is happening? The result is that in 2025, 128 journalists were murdered.

Dominique Pradalié, outgoing president of the International Federation of Journalists, in the RFI studio on 3 May. © RFI/Benoît de Solminihac


RFI: Two-thirds of these deaths are attributed to Israel, including 86 in Gaza, making it one of the deadliest places in the world for journalists. Yet the protection of journalists in war zones is guaranteed by international law. Why, in your view, are these principles so difficult to apply in Gaza today?

DP: In Gaza, a genocide is under way. To prevent any testimony, the Israeli army, the Israeli government – dominated by the far right – has decided to target all journalists. At least 250 have been killed in two years. A massacre that no one, even in their worst nightmares, would have imagined possible.

You mentioned international conventions. Nothing specific exists for the protection of journalists. Absolutely nothing. They are considered civilians, that is all. Civilians are more or less protected depending on the parties involved and the nature of the wars.

But journalists need specific protection. After working extensively with international lawyers, we have drawn up a convention, a text against impunity. Nothing exists at the international level against impunity for the murderers of journalists. And this text provides, in particular, for permanent annual monitoring. This means that every country, every year, will have to report on what it has done to promote press freedom.

Independent international teams will be deployed to investigate in countries where journalists have been killed and where justice has not been served. They will attempt to find not only the killers but also the instigators, and bring them to justice.

Record killing of journalists reveals rising global threat to press freedom

RFI: Is there currently evidence available in any of these cases that could help establish clear accountability?

DP: Absolutely. I’ll give three examples. In Serbia and in Greece, there have been acquittals very recently for the murderers of journalists, on the grounds that it wasn’t fully proven that they had actually tried to kill them. I’ll leave it to you to interpret and understand what these words might mean for the family and for the profession. These journalists were deliberately killed. The third example is in Latin America, and there are numerous examples in Mexico where [journalists] are effectively being hunted down.

But I am thinking of our Lebanese colleague Amal Khalil, who was deliberately targeted, warned that she would be targeted if she continued, and who was murdered – just like Shireen Abu Akleh in Jenin four years ago.

In other words, governments no longer bother with any precautions whatsoever. They simply decide to eliminate inconvenient witnesses. And that is impunity, pure and simple. It is a cancer eating away at all democracies. And since journalists are part of the proper functioning of democracy, every country – and France has not yet taken a stand – must publicly declare its support for an international convention against impunity.

If this is not done by 2 November, the day designated by the United Nations to condemn impunity for the killers of journalists, everything will seem like a joke.

Lebanese journalist Amal Khalil, pictured on 22 March, 2026, was killed on 22 April, 2026. AP - Mohammed Zaatari


RFI: In the United States, President Donald Trump’s rhetoric against the media is consistently confrontational. There too, press freedom is under serious threat.

DP: Donald Trump is setting a bad example to the whole world. This man isn’t controversial just because he is president of the United States, and that is an important office. This man lies constantly. I think it was the New York Herald or the Washington Post, I can’t remember which of the two, in its list covering his two terms, reported that the US president had told more than 2,000 lies.

The press is trying to do its job, lies or no lies, and the politicians on the other side are doing what they can to keep their seats and their illegal, illiberal and harmful practices for the whole world.

RFI: How can the IFJ take concrete action in the face of the increasing number of attacks on press freedom?

DP: Well, we go out into the field whenever we can. I do it very often. Members of our executive committee do it. We file complaints, and we’re going to bring all these complaints together at an international level.

We have a pool of international lawyers who will begin working publicly on Monday at the opening of the world congress in Paris to create specific international legal remedies for all journalists, so that they are no longer hunted down like game, but can, on behalf of everyone, fulfil their mission in the public interest.

Kidnapped, killed or silenced: Africa's journalists increasingly under threat

RFI: What measures can you put in place to provide concrete protection for reporters in the field?

DP: Well, there are two types of measures for journalists, before and during their trips. We run a huge number of training courses for journalists – as you will understand, we keep these discreet, and the countries involved are also discreet – to train them in warfare techniques, espionage techniques and protection techniques.

And then, on the ground, we provide aid in Ukraine in particular, but also in Gaza. We have three aid centres in Gaza, where we provide protective equipment and all sorts of forms of daily assistance. That’s part of our day to day work. The same is true in Sudan, and it’s true in Iran too, where we do what we can. But there too, we’re discreet above all else. So, we’re providing training and direct support through our affiliates. We have 188 affiliates worldwide. We’re not doing enough, but at least we’re doing something.

RFI: Is press freedom making progress in any part of the world?

DP: I won’t go through all 148 countries where we have affiliates in detail, but I would say that there are indeed a number of countries [where this is the case], such as Uruguay, from where I have just returned. There, in the name of press freedom, they are creating a press council and a specific chamber set aside in the Uruguayan parliament. And this is something could be done everywhere for journalists, to demonstrate the importance a government attaches to press freedom.

This article has been adapted from the original interview in French by Olivier Chermann and lightly edited for clarity.

Hungary: What will become of Orban and his system?

Keno Verseck

DW 

30/04/2026 

Outgoing Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and his Fidesz party are still reeling from their election defeat earlier this month. There is much speculation about what their political future looks like.

There were celebrations all over Hungary after Viktor Orban conceded defeat on April 12

Image: Leonhard Foeger/REUTERS

When Viktor Orban was narrowly voted out of office for the first time in 2002, he went through a deep personal crisis. "The homeland cannot be in the opposition!" he said at the time.

In other words, according to his image of himself, only he and his Fidesz party could truly represent the interests of the Hungarian nation; he was its sole legitimate representative. The statement left a deep impression on the Hungarian public.

It was the experience of 2002 that prompted Orban from 2010 to use his two-thirds majority to establish the System of National Cooperation (NER), intended to prevent a reoccurrence of his defeat. Not only did he tailor the electoral system to his party but he also created a vast clientelist system, a sophisticated surveillance apparatus and a massive propaganda machine to secure his power. This system helped him remain in power for 16 years.

That is likely why, up until the election on April 12, the defeat of his Fidesz party was unimaginable for Orban. When the results were announced in the evening, his defeat was so significant that he initially seemed almost speechless.

He disappeared from public life for a few days. Then he gave the only in-depth interview since election day, to Patriota, a YouTube channel that has been loyal to his party. In it, he spoke of the "pain and emptiness" that he had been filled with. Orban also announced that he would resist "the destruction of what we have built."

With regards to mistakes made while he was in government, he admitted that he regretted that the expansion of the Paks nuclear power plant, undertaken with Russian assistance, had not been completed. The journalist, a supporter, was visibly taken aback.

Much speculation in Hungarian society

What will now become of Orban and the system he has built over the past 16 years? Does the long-time autocrat have a chance of remaining in politics? Or is his career over? Will he leave the country, as rumors suggest? What will happen to his party, Fidesz, which was tailored entirely to him? What about the Orban dynasty, which has amassed immense wealth, and what about the oligarchs and tens of thousands of well-paid beneficiaries of the outgoing prime minister's regime?

These are the questions Hungarian society is asking right now. In search of answers, many media outlets are reporting on every single remark made by Orban and his allies, and every move made by his oligarchs and cronies. It shows how many Hungarians felt as if they were held hostage for years and how strong the desire is for a reckoning and systemic change.

Widespread corruption and abuse of power

So far, Orban has refused to take any responsibility for the alleged abuse of power in his regime and shown no public remorse. During the campaign, he announced that he would remain a parliamentarian but would step down as head of Fidesz in case of an election defeat, all the while brushing off this eventuality.

Instead, Orban has indeed stepped down from his parliamentary seat, but not yet announced his resignation as party leader. He has offered to quit but underlined that he stands ready "for the community."

The party has said that it will hold a new leadership conference in June. The dilemma faced by Fidesz is that it would fall apart without Orban, as the party is completely centered on him. And yet with him it will retain the reputation of being a corrupt and autocratic party among all but its small core voter base.

In a video posted on Facebook, Orban himself announced his future plans in a way that was quite remarkable in semantic terms: "I am not needed in parliament right now but in the reorganization of the national side."

For many Hungarians, this is a continuation of Orban's long-standing story: That the part of the Hungarian population that supports him are the true Hungarians, but nobody else.

Many view the gesture of giving up his parliamentary seat as both shirking responsibility and an attempt to reassert dominance. Many feel Orban probably does not want to subject himself to the humiliation of having to hear criticism of himself and his system in parliament. At the same time, he apparently also considers it beneath his dignity to be just a lawmaker.

Fidesz will decide on the next party leader in June

Image: Attila Kisbenedek/AFP

Are oligarchs transferring funds?

The political scientist Daniel Rona recently predicted on the Hungarian news portal Telex that Orban would likely wait to see how things developed over the coming months before making a concrete decision on how to shape his political and personal future.

Investigative journalist Szabolcs Panyi wrote that Orban was considering going to the United States and applying for asylum there, but that is unlikely. This would destroy his work in Hungary, deal a fatal blow to his party and political community and also severely damage his family dynasty.

Orban's father and younger brother are two of the wealthiest business people in Hungary, involved predominantly in the mining and construction sectors. His eldest daughter Rahel and her husband Istvan Tiborcz, who are also among Hungary's richest individuals, emigrated to the US last year. The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) investigated Tiborcz on several occasions based on alleged irregularities and conflicts of interest regarding state tenders. It forwarded recommendations to the Hungarian authorities and called for EU funds to be returned. In Hungary, the proceedings were shelved.

There are signs of movement among Orban's associates too. A few days ago, incoming Hungarian Prime Minister Peter Magyar accused the people many regard as Orban's cronies of transferring billions to foreign accounts in order to evade anti-corruption investigations and planned attempts to recover assets. Though there is no concrete evidence of this, Hungarian media outlets have reported on numerous financial transactions on the part of oligarchs, such as Orban's childhood friend Lorinc Meszaros, a businessman and former politician.

Many in Orban's party are still in a state of disbelief over their election defeat, and have turned to religion in an attempt to explain it. Outgoing Speaker of the National Assembly Laszlo Kover described it as a "temporary victory for satanic forces" but added that "in the end, victory belongs to Jesus Christ."

Zsolt Jeszenszky, a well-known influencer from the Orban camp, said that he thought the outgoing prime minister had "unintentionally committed idolatry" during a visit to India in early 2025, thereby "opening the door to evil spirits in his life."

Others have said that the defeat was caused by opportunistic profiteers in the Orban system. But few Fidesz loyalists have blamed corruption and abuse of power for the party's defeat.

This article was translated from German.

INTERVIEW

Dismantling Orban’s legacy: the reforms that lie ahead for Hungary

After 16 years of illiberal governance under outgoing prime minister Viktor Orban, restoring the rule of law in Hungary is not just a political transition but a full-on regime change, says Balint Magyar, a former Hungarian education minister and author of a study on Orban-era state capture. It will also mean bringing some of Orban's high-profile loyalists to trial.


Issued on: 30/04/2026 - 
FRANCE24
By: Sonya CIESNIK

Hungary's election winner Peter Magyar talks to the media after talks between parties on preparations for the first session of the Parliament in Budapest, Hungary on April 17, 2026. © Bernadett Szabo, Reuters

Following Viktor Orban’s election defeat on April 12, new Hungarian premier Peter Magyar has promised to seek justice for crimes committed by his predecessor's network of political allies and the oligarchs who supported them.

The corruption is well entrenched: Orban dominated Hungarian politics for years without any serious challenger, and there has never been another figure in the country’s modern history who amassed so much power in such a relatively short period of time.

From the media to the judicial system and from universities to local governments, Orban’s empire infiltrated every state institution. Nothing could be done in Hungary without political connections, one of Hungary’s wealthiest businessman told the Polish newspaper Gazeta Wyborcza in April, while asking to remain anonymous.

Magyar’s centre-right Tisza party won 141 seats in parliament out of 199 in the April elections, giving it a large majority to strengthen the rule of law and potentially unlock billions in funding from the European Union, which froze the allocation under Orban due to concerns over corruption and democratic backsliding.


Yet time is of the essence: Magyar has warned that oligarchs allied with Orban have begun siphoning off assets to the United States, the United Arab Emirates, Uruguay and "other distant countries”.

The Polish experience could provide some insight into what options exist for Hungary. After a liberal opposition bloc led by Donald Tusk came out ahead in October 2023 parliamentary elections, Tusk pledged as prime minister to reform Poland’s institutions following eight years of right-wing Law and Justice (PiS) party rule. He immediately fired high-profile figures and bypassed some of the legal obstacles left by the previous government.

FRANCE 24 spoke with Balint Magyar – a sociologist, former education minister and author of the book, “The Hungarian Octopus: The Post-Communist Mafia State” – who argues that Hungary is embarking on not just a change of government, but a full-on regime change.

Magyar has promised to go after corrupt officials who were part of the so-called Orban system. Does he risk falling into the very illiberalism he pledged to abolish in seeking a rupture from the Orban years?

Peter Magyar won 53% of the votes in the elections on April 12, which gives him a more than two-thirds majority in the parliament. It meant that Orban’s attempts to make election law more disproportionate backfired. Such a constitutional majority is enough to change any law.

Among Magyar’s promises during the elections was instituting a proportional electoral system. The incoming premier has also promised to limit the maximum time for future prime ministers to two terms – eight years total.

What happened was not a government change but a regime change. A government change means that basic values are shared by the competing parties. In a regime, the competing parties do not share the same political values.

Hungarians witnessed the first regime change in 1990 from a communist dictatorship to a liberal democracy.

The second regime change happened in 2010, from a liberal democracy to an autocracy. This is what Orban called “a revolution at the ballot boxes”. In 2011, he rushed a new constitution through the parliament without any consultation with the public (called the Fundamental Law of Hungary, the new constitution codified a new interpretation of history and ethno-nationalist principles).

Magyar’s victory represents the third regime change in Hungary’s recent history, from an autocracy – hopefully – back to a liberal democracy. The incoming premier has pledged to hold a referendum on accepting a new constitution.

How difficult will it be to prosecute high-placed officials like Peter Szijjarto, the minister of foreign affairs and trade, who reportedly leaked information on EU summit discussions to Russia?

Looking to turn the page on Orban’s tenure, Magyar has pledged to pursue officials and corporate leaders accused of corruption: during his campaign, he launched a programme called “Road to Prison”. This was not an ordinary type of corruption. If you look at the international scene, you can see charges brought against Poland's former deputy minister of justice in the Law and Justice government, Marcin Romanowski, or against Romanian politicians. These are minor cases compared to the scale of robbery of the state committed by the Orban clan’s politicians and oligarchs.

The Fidesz government operated like a mafia state. All contributing members of society were subordinated to it: it was a political enterprise which captured the state, the economy and the oligarchs. The mafia state had two motivations: monopolising political power and accumulating personal and family wealth. With the possibility of unilaterally appointing the heads of the controlling organisations and the presidents of the republic, central bank, constitutional court, chief attorney’s office and state account office, Orban could exercise direct coercion and blackmail over the whole society. As all these figures were subordinated to Orban, he could govern the state as a criminal organisation. Most of these actors and Orban-related oligarchs committed crimes, according to existing Hungarian legal code.

Magyar has called on all the leaders of the above-mentioned institutions to resign. If they don’t comply, he will use legal means to oust them from their positions.

Police have already begun investigations even though Magyar’s government isn’t in office yet. I don’t think rank-and-file loyalists will be prosecuted. What we will witness is the total collapse of the mafia-state organisation led by Orban.

Also, the difference between the Hungarian and Polish cases is that the Polish leader of the PiS party, Jaroslaw Kacznyski, was an autocrat but not a criminal, while Orban was an autocrat and a criminal at the same time.

There will be widespread legal procedures, although I have some doubt that stolen state assets will be recouped. (Wealthy Hungarians are leaving the country and transferring financial assets, according to the Financial Times.)

Orban has been voted out, but he once famously said in an interview with an Austrian tabloid that he "would like to tie the hands of the next government. And not only of the next, but of the following 10 governments." How big of a threat does he and Fidesz present to the incoming government?

Orban’s defeat in the latest elections represents not only a political, but a total moral collapse. There is a difference between a mafia state and a “classic” mafia. The positions within a classic mafia are informal positions: they can bribe public servants if needed, but they mainly operate outside the governmental bodies.

In the case of the mafia state, the positions are positioned within the state apparatus. After winning a constitutional majority, Magyar’s centre-right Tisza party can take back these political and administrative positions. Orban’s political-economic clan, therefore, faces an unavoidable collapse.

A national opinion poll published this week asked Hungarians for the main reason for Orban’s defeat. Some 49% responded that it was corruption, around 18% responded that it was the bad economic situation, and around 10% attributed the defeat to the lies of the government. This represents the dual nature of wide popular discontent: namely, the complete amorality and incapacity of Orban’s regime.

This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.