The Hungarian judiciary has today discontinued criminal proceedings against Gergely Karácsony, the mayor of Budapest, who had been accused of authorising the 2025 Pride march in defiance of a national ban. The decision, delivered by the Budapest Regional Court, cited insufficient evidence that the mayor had exceeded his legal remit, a finding that has reignited debate over Hungary’s controversial sovereignty law and the European Union’s capacity to enforce its values.
The case against Karácsony, a prominent opposition figure and former green politician, has been watched closely in Brussels as a test of Hungary’s judicial independence. The charges, brought by the government-appointed prosecutor’s office in late 2025, alleged that the mayor had abused his position by issuing a permit for the march after the Hungarian parliament passed legislation banning all public assemblies promoting homosexuality. The law, officially titled the Act on the Protection of National Sovereignty, was condemned by the European Commission as a violation of Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, which enshrines respect for human rights.
In its ruling, the court noted that while the Pride event did take place, the mayor had not acted with the requisite intent to break the law. The judgement further stated that the sovereignty law does not clearly define the limits of municipal authority in such matters, a point critics seized upon as evidence of the law’s vagueness. The European Union’s chief legal officer, in a non-binding opinion issued last week, had recommended that the European Court of Justice strike down the ban, describing it as a disproportionate restriction on freedom of assembly.
The Commission’s response has been swift. In a statement released this afternoon, European Commissioner for Justice Didier Reynders said the dropping of charges was 'a necessary first step' but called for the Hungarian government to repeal the sovereignty law in its entirety. 'The EU cannot accept that its member states use legal instruments to silence dissent or target political opponents,' Reynders said. 'We are reviewing all available measures, including the triggering of Article 7 procedures and the withholding of cohesion funds.'
Budapest’s Pride march, which drew an estimated 50,000 participants in June 2025, was the largest in the city’s history and had been organized in explicit defiance of the ban. The event passed without major clashes, though police made 32 arrests for minor public order offences. Karácsony, speaking outside the courthouse, welcomed the ruling as a victory for 'common sense' but warned that Hungary’s democratic backsliding was far from over. 'Today the law was on our side, but the law can change. We need Europe to stand firm,' he said.
The Hungarian government, through its official spokesperson, dismissed the court’s decision as 'a technicality' and reiterated its position that the sovereignty law is necessary to protect Hungarian children and national culture. 'Brussels has no right to dictate who we allow to parade on our streets,' the spokesperson said. 'The fight is not over.'
Legal analysts suggest the EU’s options are limited. The Article 7 process against Hungary, launched in 2018, remains stalled due to a lack of unanimity among member states. Meanwhile, the European Commission has withheld billions of euros in cohesion funds over rule-of-law concerns, but Budapest has responded by cutting public services and launching a nationalistic media campaign against 'EU blackmail'. The 2025 Pride decision, viewed in this context, is less a resolution than a flashpoint. The EU’s credibility in enforcing its own founding principles hangs in the balance.
