Peter Hack's route out of the chaos

The last two presidents had good reason for doing what many are now demanding of Laszlo Solyom. They agreed with the leaders of the various parliamentary parties on candidates for nomination to state offices. The approach Laszlo Solyom is taking to nominations is fine in legal terms, but in practice it doesn't work. But there is a way of dealing with this chaos.

My proposal relates to those offices where a two thirds qualifided majority in parliament is required to appoint a new official. I would not support this approach in the case of the Supreme Prosecutor.

A constitutional rule could be devised that would reflect the intentions behind the existing system while avoiding the chaos. An amendment could allow the president to nominate three people for each position (reflecting the practice at the European Court of Human Rights). Any candidate who gained two thirds majority support in a first round of parliamentary voting would be appointed. If nobody got two thirds support, then in the next round any candidate with more than half the votes would be appointed. If there was still no appointment, then the candidate with the most votes would win in a third round.

This approach would preserve the president's sovereign right to nominate, meaning only candidates whom the president regarded as suited to the job would have a chance of being appointed. It would also preserve parliament's sovereign decision, since only someone with more votes than anybody else could be appointed. The committee hearings would remain important, since it would allow the public to learn something about the candidates and their views, but the committee would not vote on the individuals. Losing this vote would not matter, since the current system does not prescribe any consequences for a committee vote.

This approach would make sure that state positions would not go unfilled for months on end. One of the nominees would be sure to be chosen. It would not affect the prestige of the various institutions involved, and nor would the prestige of the candidates be affected if they were chosen by a transparent process of public competition.

Péter Hack, lawyer