Recently, one of the hot topics has been the 'Schmitt case' in the Hungarian media. (It turned out in January that Pál Schmitt, president of Hungary plagiarized the majority of his doctoral thesis. He has not been able to clear himself of the plagiary charge yet.) Even though the media focuses eagerly on Schmitt's thesis, I have to ask whether 'the Schmitt case' exists at all. My answer is a clear no.
There is no 'Schmitt case', there is only a 'Fidesz case'. Fidesz is the only party that has not commented on Schmitt's plagiary, though it was Fidesz who made Schmitt president. Relying on their two-third majority, Fidesz pushed Schmitt through the Parliament. No other political or civil powers backed the Fidesz candidate. They allude to the separation of powers, and leading Fidesz politicians say they and the Fidesz government have nothing to do with the president. This is not true, of course, and there is also a pitfall in their argument. It should be the party and not the government which comments on Schmitt's plagiary, once it is the parties that nominate candidates. It is a correct illustration of the political situation in Hungary that nobody has ever noticed this pitfall, and nobody can distinguish Fidesz as a party, and the government. Fidesz does not event want to make a distinction between the state, the government, the parliament, and itself.
The 'Fidesz cases' have a common cornerstone. If they cannot defend their interest or attack somebody else's interest on legal fields, they use morality, and the other way around. If they cannot use morality, then they turn to legal means. Fidesz has followed this policy since 1994. We can call this strategy immoral that lacks any respect towards the 'spirit of law'. Of course they use this policy in the current situation as well. It is immoral what Pál Schmitt did, so Fidesz comes up with a legal explanation, and talks about the separation of powers in order to hide Schmitt's scandal.
'Fidesz case' is the real issue which should be solved as soon as possible!