The point of the presumption of innocence is to never cause an unfair disadvantage to anyone based on a single, controversial claim. Apparently, this principle was completely disregarded in a recent case in Hungary on the deportation of an Iranian university student for allegedly having infringed the quarantine rules.

Hungary scapgoated Iranian students at beginning of coronavirus crisis

As reported earlier, at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic the Hungarian government claimed the first people in Hungary to become infected were Iranian citizens. At government press conferences these Iranian people were accused of not complying with the separation rules at the hospital. In refuting these claims, the accused people told the press that hospital staff had not informed them of the measures, and beyond poor conditions it was very disappointing to be locked up together with a fellow student who the doctors already knew had tested positive for coronavirus.

The student to be expelled according to the 25 April decision of the immigration authority and her sister had been both subject to criminal proceedings, although these were later dropped. The Hungarian Civil Liberties Union (HCLU), which represented the medical student, went to court to challenge the deportation order. However, since their action was dismissed by the Capital Court in its ruling of 25 May, the court's decision is now final and can be enforced.

Police proposed the expulsion and the court ruled that immigration officials could not reject the proposal even if they wanted to

The expulsion of the Iranian university student was proposed by the police, and justified on the basis that her residence in Hungary is a threat to public safety and public security. However, the foundations of this claim were left unexamined. Witnesses were not heard, no evidence was collected, and it was never proven whether the two sisters had, in fact, committed an infringement by leaving the place assigned to them.

In the judgment of the court, the immigration authority was bound by the proposition of the police, and the court was not in a position to assess the justification of this proposition. The reference to the presumption of innocence in the action brought by HCLU was also found unfounded by the court: citing an earlier decision of the highest judicial authority, the Curia, the court argued that the fact of criminal proceedings pending before the court may be assessed in terms of immigration policing.

While failing to find a way within the proceedings to evaluate the legal basis of the student's accusation, the court also disregarded the fact that so far only Iranian citizens have been subjected to proceedings, despite the presence of other people coming from a variety of countries on the site where the separation occurred. In such a situation the burden of proof lies with the authority, not those concerned by the measure in question, to confirm that no discrimination took place.

Case highlights lacks of effective remedies in Hungary

The case shows the lack of effective remedies in Hungary when the police proposes expelling people from the country to the immigration authority. These proposals are not allowed to be reviewed by either the immigration authority or the courts. This is unconstitutional, yet the court failed to identify any constitutional concerns in the relevant legislation and, despite the action brought by HCLU, the proceedings were not suspended and the Constitutional Court was not accessed in the matter. The same legal arguments served as the basis of another court ruling in the case of two other Iranian students, not represented by HCLU, while each judgment was delivered by a different judge.

"We are going to avail of all possible legal remedies, however, the coming proceedings will be unable to prevent the expulsion, that is, the implementation of the expulsion order by the authorities. In fact, the deportation was also unnecessary because, given what had happened, our client was ready to voluntarily leave the country," said HCLU lawyer Kata Nehéz-Pozony, adding that none of the authorities have considered the conduct and lifestyle of the student in Hungary or what she had to say with respect to her case.