The University of Pécs has closed its investigation and declared: the accusation of plagiarism against me cannot be proved. Here, we could put an end to the case, still, let me make some comments:

1. I do not know whether analysts, public writers, journalists understand what they say when asserting that, although, in civilized countries, the accuser must prove the culpability of the defendant, the contrary is true in politics, that is, the burden of proof is reversed and the accused, suspected person has to dispel the suspicion; if this is the case, then they contribute to the country’s becoming barbarian and to an uninterrupted series of character murders. I add to it for better understanding, that this logic produces such cognomens like “goose-thief Bajnai” or “Wizz Air Oszkó”...

2. I do not accept this approach. I do not put an end to the case because, beside justified criticism or some argued professional or political attacks, I have faced so much dirty suspicion (not infrequently against my family) during my political career that I was able not only to understand but, many times, to perceive how just the most absurd suspicion itself can kill if one is ready to accept it as a real fact.

3. Political accusation is part of the political fight. Accusation is a weapon fired by the opposing forces and it is almost sure that it will cause some injury. Because, there is always somebody who believes that suspicion, the accusation, even if it is the most absurd one. Whether the weapon fired will kill you or not, depends on two factors: on the targeting accuracy, i.e. on the well-foundedness of the suspicion, on the one hand, and on the reaction of the multitude of voters, especially from one’s own political side, on the other hand.
 Here are some examples. The reason why Orbán did not fail in the scandal of Tokay vinery is not that it was unfounded but because his backers remained loyal to him despite the truth which was against Orbán. On the other hand, against all arguments saying the contrary, the reason why Schmitt resigned was not his moral grandeur but rather that the right wing backed out from behind him. In addition, there is a third case as well; when your own political community passes a sentence on you already when there is only a suspicion without any proof. Subject to the motivations, it can be irrational or immoral, or maybe both.

4. So, is it no matter what the truth is? It is not the case at all. But because we know that politics is not only a fight of facts but also (and even more in the short run) a fight of appearances and interpretations, and what is more, all these frequently dressed in a moral mantle, it is worth it for the small number of people who still want to understand not to go to the political slaughter-house voluntarily. Opponents always want to get rid of their rivals. This was the intention in this case, too. Lots of people wanted to have this government and more than a few of them on the side of the opposition. At any price. The Right is of no account in this fight. But: what to think about those left liberal democrats for whom the suspicion generated by the Right was sufficient?

5. A democratic politician is elevated to the height by his backers or left to fall to defeat.  We will see in 2014 how many voters want the alternative that we, the Democratic Coalition offer, and which alternative is personalized by myself among others. In the meantime, we wish a good work to our adversaries and friends.
Ferenc Gyurcsány, Facebook/Gyurcsanyblog; May 16. 2012.