Hungarian police brought in pro-Orbán influencer István Szakács on Wednesday, 8 July, on suspicion of threatening to commit a terrorist act, after he posted a Facebook video warning Prime Minister Péter Magyar and his government not to arrest former prime minister Viktor Orbán or face the wrath of ‘500,000 Hungarians’ coming to free him.
Szakács was questioned as a suspect and released within hours, but the terrorism-related suspicion triggered an unusual political backlash: condemnation came not only from the usual Fidesz-linked figures, but also from anti-Orbán commentators, lawyers, and analysts, who called the police action excessive or dangerous for freedom of expression.
The Interior Ministry initially said the authorities had acted lawfully, adding that every substantive procedural step in the case had been coordinated with prosecutors. The Budapest Chief Prosecution Office later narrowed that account, saying the National Bureau of Investigation (NNI) had opened the case on 3 July on ‘suspicion of threatening to commit a terrorist act’, informed prosecutors by phone on 7 July that it planned a search, bringing in, and suspect interrogation, but made the procedural decision independently. Prosecutors said approval was neither required nor given, and that Szakács was ‘not formally taken into custody’.
Orbán immediately described the case as political intimidation. ‘Authoritarianism has reached a new level,’ he wrote in a post on Facebook, adding that people could now be taken away by police for daring to criticize the prime minister. ‘Today him, tomorrow you. Do not let it happen,’ he said, linking the case to Fidesz’s planned demonstration at 18:00 on Thursday against the proposed amendment of the Fundamental Law, which would remove President Tamás Sulyok from office.
The Fidesz-established legal assistance network Defence Line (Védvonal), led by Fidesz politician Judit Czunyiné Bertalan, promised Szakács support and accused the authorities of using law enforcement as a ‘political club’.
The more politically striking part of the story, however, was that criticism quickly spread beyond the pro-Orbán camp. Former Green MP Tímea Szabó wrote that, if the known facts were complete, bringing Szakács in was a mistake. She called his statement ridiculous, but added that ‘stupidity does not constitute preparation for a terrorist act’ and that ‘being stupid is allowed in a rule-of-law state’.
‘I feel solidarity not with István Szakács, but with freedom of expression’
Anti-Orbán influencer Edina Pottyondy also called the house search ‘unpleasant and excessive’, while urging police to focus on serious corruption cases instead of ‘Fidesz-linked idiots’. Criminal lawyer Adrienn Laczó said the NNI had overreacted if the video was the sole basis of the procedure, arguing that such a serious offence would require a more concrete threat. She described Szakács’s words as closer to empty bluster than a real terrorist threat.
Left-wing commentator Péter Konok also highlighted the free-speech aspect of the incident. He made clear that he had no sympathy for Szakács personally, but was alarmed that someone could be taken away over an opinion, however stupid or repulsive. ‘I feel solidarity not with István Szakács, but with freedom of expression,’ he wrote. Publicist Martin Ethelwolf, known as FAM, similarly mocked the idea of Szakács as the organizer of a 500,000-person armed uprising, calling the thought ‘surreal’.
While Orbán immediately condemned what he described as ‘political intimidation’, similar cases were also reported during his 16 years in government. The closest parallel to the current incident is the 2023 case in which a Facebook commenter was brought in after a blunt online remark was treated as a bomb and death threat against pro-Orbán influencer Dániel Deák. The comment read as follows:
‘I have hidden a pipe bomb somewhere in your house. In order to find out where it is and defuse it, you will have to reach even deeper into Orbán’s arse and remove the geocache hidden there. If you fail, it will explode in 5 hours and 34 minutes.’
The proportionality of that conduct was questioned in a similar way to the concerns now being raised in Szakács’s case: whether absurd or inflammatory online speech should trigger coercive criminal proceedings.
The formal legal basis is Section 316 of the Criminal Code, under which threatening to commit a terrorist act is punishable by two to eight years in prison. The video at the centre of the case was Szakács’s warning that, if Orbán were taken away, ‘500,000 Hungarians’ would go and free him ‘from anywhere’. Szakács denies calling for violence, saying he meant political and legal support for Orbán.
According to Szakács’s own account, seven officers arrived at around 6am, searched his home for items suitable for a terrorist act, handcuffed him, questioned and processed him, then released him. The case now turns on his complaint against the suspicion, which prosecutors said they will assess when deciding whether the police interpretation of the video was legally grounded.
The controversy surrounding Szakács also follows another recent police action against a pro-Orbán online figure. In June, Zsolt Bede of Vadhajtások, a notorious radical pro-Orbán website, was searched and later questioned on suspicion of personal-data misuse after the already mentioned Pottyondy filed a complaint over an article allegedly targeting her minor child. Police seized electronic devices, while Bede and his lawyer alleged procedural abuses and filed counter-complaints. Bede described the police action as ‘political intimidation’ and argued that a ‘dictatorship has arrived’ in Hungary.
Related articles:
At a time when public debate is increasingly polarized and superficial, Hungarian Conservative remains committed to depth, intellectual honesty, and independent conservative thought.
Producing high-quality journalism requires resources. Your contribution helps us expand our coverage, reach new audiences, and keep our content accessible.
Please consider supporting our mission.
