Civil society organisations are urging the European Commission to act swiftly against Budapest in a case involving a civil rights dispute. Hungarian authorities banned a pride march and routinely use facial recognition software to identify protesters. NGOs claim this contravenes both the AI Act and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.
In a joint letter to Michael McGrath, the EU Commissioner for Democracy, Justice, the Rule of Law and Consumer Protection, several prominent organisations, including the Civil Liberties Union for Europe, EDRi (European Digital Rights), the European Center for Not-for-Profit Law, and the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union, called for urgent infringement proceedings. They claim Hungary is breaking the AI Act and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Therefore, the groups urged Brussels “to ensure the safety of participants and organisers and to safeguard fundamental rights within the Union”.
The ban of the so-called Pécs Pride scheduled for 4 October 2025 in Pécs was upheld by Hungary’s highest court, the Kúria. The move marks a fresh escalation in what rights groups describe as a “systematic dismantling of EU values and legal obligations”.
Biometric identification
“According to current Hungarian legislation, anyone attending will be committing an infraction,” the letter to Mr McGrath notes. It adds that the decision to ban the march follows the April 2025 legislative amendments that criminalise participation in some LGBTQ+ focused events. In cases the police prohibits the organisation of such an event, attendance may earn participants penalties including heavy fines.
These amendments also authorise the use of facial recognition technology against protesters. According to civil society’s legal analysis, this real-time biometric identification is in direct breach of Article 5 of the EU Artificial Intelligence Act.
You might be interested
For the organisations, Hungary is therefore not only violating the EU’s ban on biometric mass surveillance but also undermining fundamental rights enshrined in the Charter, including freedom of expression, the right to peaceful assembly, and protection against discrimination.
Mass surveillance
Early this year, the Hungarian parliament adopted a law that explicitly banned so-called Pride events and authorised the use of real-time facial recognition technology to identify participants. Pride organisers and marchers now face fines of up to €500. Officials justified the measures on “child protection” grounds, but critics argue this rhetoric is being misused to legitimise discrimination.
The Pécs Pride is the first event to fall directly under these legislative amendments, which criminalise participation in banned assemblies. For the first time, attendees risk exposure to biometric surveillance, a practice prohibited under Article 5 of the EU’s Artificial Intelligence Act, which bans such monitoring in public spaces except under narrowly defined conditions. The Advocate General of the Court of Justice has already confirmed that Hungary’s so-called “child protection law” violates EU law, including Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union.
Hungary’s use of facial recognition to surveil Pride events marks a worrying change in how new technologies can be used to suppress dissent and target marginalised communities. — Civil Liberties Union for Europe
For civil society groups, Hungary’s approach carries implications far beyond its borders. “Hungary’s use of facial recognition to surveil Pride events marks a worrying change in how new technologies can be used to suppress dissent and target marginalised communities,” the Civil Liberties Union for Europe warned in June. They cautioned that if Brussels fails to respond decisively, other governments could adopt the same playbook, invoking morality or public safety to normalise invasive surveillance and curtail protest rights.
Defying Budapest
Despite threats of legal consequences, Budapest hosted its 30th Pride march in June, which turned into both a protest and a celebration. Tens of thousands joined, with organisers estimating nearly 200k participa,nts, the largest turnout in the event’s history. Dozens of Members of the European Parliament marched alongside activists, defying the ban; 33 governments worldwide voiced their support for the cause.
Urgent action is essential to ensure the safety of participants and organisers and to safeguard fundamental rights within the Union — NGO letter to Commissioner McGrath
The complaint may add to a string of clashes between Brussels and Budapest concerning the rule of law. That, in turn, may jeopardise the transfer of substantial financial sums from EU funds to Hungary.
