Tóth M. Gábor has been re-elected as the president of the Budapest Bar Association for another four-year term following Friday’s vote.
The incumbent, who has led the organization since 2018, secured his position despite challenges from two other legal organization leaders. Out of 1,836 chamber members eligible to vote, 1,194 members supported Tóth, according to reports from HVG.
Tóth Defeats Two Legal Organization Leaders
Tóth faced two challengers during the election process. One was Tamás Gerő, the president of the Association of Lawyers for a Democratic Rule of Law, and the other was Lóránt Horváth, the head of the Ügyvédkör. Economx reported that both challengers lead their own respective legal organizations.
In a statement to MTI, Tóth said that the high number of supporters indicated a desire for continuity.
“1,194 people thought that the kind of predictable, stable chamber operation that has been present as a symbol of independence over the past eight years should continue,” said Tóth M. Gábor.
Tóth M. Gábor
Tóth’s primary objectives for his upcoming term include strengthening the legal profession and the chamber’s operations, as well as creating a more open organization.
Horváth, who lost the election, commented on the outcome by telling MTI that forces seeking change failed to break through the “walls of the past.” He added that for some reason, Budapest lawyers do not want any change compared to previous times. Following the results, he congratulated Tóth on his Facebook page, Index reported.
Complaint Against Horváth Triggers Disciplinary Proceedings
The election was preceded by tension involving a preliminary disciplinary procedure initiated against Horváth. According to HVG, the proceedings began following a complaint from István Lajtár, a deputy prosecutor general acting in the capacity of the prosecutor general.
The complaint alleged that Horváth’s statements undermined public confidence in the prosecutorial organization, damaged the authority of the prosecutor’s office, and threatened the effectiveness of criminal proceedings.
Horváth, whose firm represents Ukrainian money transporters and related companies in the so-called golden convoy case, also provides legal representation for Fürcht Pál, who stepped down from his position as head of the Central Investigating Prosecutor’s Office in the summer.
Horváth stated in a message to MTI that the chamber had initiated this preliminary procedure three days before the election due to allegations of “representation unworthy of a lawyer, as well as incompatible professional engagement.” He said to Klubrádió that the chamber had sat on the investigation for a month, suggesting the timing raised suspicions of direction, as it could have been initiated three weeks prior or five days prior.
Tóth addressed the timing of the investigation, telling HVG that the matter was a mandatory preliminary investigation required by law whenever a disciplinary report is received. He rejected claims that the proceedings influenced the campaign, stating that the matter would not have been made public if Horváth had not disclosed it himself.
Members Vote Despite Horváth Skipping Public Debate
A large portion of the membership voted in the election. The following table summarizes the participation and results as reported by HVG and Economx:
| Category | Figure |
|---|---|
| Total eligible voters | 1,836 |
| Votes for Tóth M. Gábor | 1,194 |
While the candidates held a public debate on the Thursday before the election, Horváth did not participate. He informed the public prior to the debate that he would not attend due to the ongoing preliminary investigation, HVG reported.