Hungary’s President Tamás Sulyok signed a constitutional amendment on 18 July 2026 that formally ends his own mandate, a development that restructures the government’s presidential office ahead of a planned new constitution. Under the amendment, parliament will elect a new president to serve until a new constitution enters into force, or for a maximum of five years, whichever comes first. The Hungarian President’s constitutional amendment represents one of the most significant institutional changes to the nation’s political architecture in recent years.
The Constitutional Amendment And Its Provisions
The amendment was approved by the Hungarian parliament before being transmitted to Sulyok for signature, which he provided on 18 July 2026 (Euronews). The legislation modifies the existing constitutional framework governing the presidential term, replacing the fixed mandate structure with a transitional arrangement tied to the timeline of a forthcoming new constitution. The five-year ceiling functions as an outer limit in the event that constitutional drafting and ratification extend beyond that period. Parliament is now the body empowered to select the next head of state under this revised framework.
The amendment was passed through parliament as part of a broader constitutional overhaul process (Euractiv). According to ConstitutionNet, the parliamentary vote to approve the amendment preceded the presidential signature, with the legislature acting as the primary driver of the change. The amendment effectively removes Sulyok from office before his original term would have concluded under the prior constitutional arrangement. The mechanism chosen — parliamentary election of a successor rather than a popular vote — keeps the selection of the next president within the legislature.
Hungary President Constitutional Amendment: Political Background
Sulyok was elected president by parliament in February 2024, succeeding Katalin Novák following her resignation. His tenure has unfolded against a backdrop of sustained political tension between the governing Fidesz party led by Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and opposition forces, including the Tisza party led by Péter Magyar. Prior to the amendment’s passage, questions circulated publicly about whether the prime minister could constitutionally engineer the removal of a sitting president (Euronews). The constitutional amendment route, rather than an impeachment or recall mechanism, was ultimately the instrument used.
The amendment’s passage reflects the governing majority’s capacity to alter constitutional provisions, as Hungary’s constitution can be amended by a two-thirds parliamentary supermajority. Fidesz and its coalition partners have held such a supermajority for an extended period, giving the governing bloc the legislative arithmetic to enact constitutional changes without opposition support. The decision to tie the new presidential term to the timeline of a forthcoming constitution introduces a degree of institutional uncertainty, as the drafting and ratification of a new constitution involves its own political and procedural variables.
Sulyok’s Role In Signing The Amendment
Sulyok’s act of signing the amendment that terminates his own mandate is constitutionally notable. Under Hungarian law, the president holds the power to sign or refer legislation to the Constitutional Court or return it to parliament. By signing the amendment, Sulyok did not exercise either of those alternative options (Reuters). The signature completes the legislative cycle and gives the amendment legal force. The decision not to contest or delay the measure through available constitutional mechanisms means the transition to a new presidential selection process will proceed on the timeline set by parliament.
Parliamentary Election Of A New President
With the amendment now in force, parliament is tasked with electing a new President. The individual elected will hold office under the transitional terms established by the amendment until a new constitution takes effect or for up to five years. The parliamentary election mechanism means that the composition of the legislature at the time of the vote will determine the outcome. Given the current distribution of seats, the governing majority retains significant influence over who will be selected. No date for the presidential election in parliament had been publicly confirmed in the sources available at the time of publication.
The five-year maximum term provides a defined outer boundary for the transitional presidency, but the actual duration will depend on the pace of constitutional reform. If a new constitution is adopted and enters into force before five years have elapsed, the transitional President’s mandate would conclude at that point. This structure links the presidency directly to the constitutional reform process, making the two tracks institutionally interdependent. The broader constitutional overhaul that the amendment anticipates has not yet produced a publicly available draft or confirmed ratification schedule based on the sources provided.
Outlook: Institutional And Political Trajectories
The signing of the Hungarian president’s constitutional amendment sets in motion two parallel institutional processes: the parliamentary election of a new head of state and the drafting of a new constitution. The pace and outcome of the constitutional process will determine whether the transitional presidency lasts months or approaches the five-year ceiling. If constitutional drafting stalls or becomes contested, the transitional President could serve for an extended period under a framework that was explicitly designed as temporary.
The amendment also raises questions about the relationship between the executive and the presidency going forward. The President’s role in Hungary is largely ceremonial, but the office carries constitutional functions, including the signing or referral of legislation, that can have practical significance. The identity of the next President, and the political circumstances of their election, will shape how those functions are exercised during the transitional period. Opposition parties, including Magyar’s Tisza party, may seek to contest or scrutinise the parliamentary election process, though the governing majority’s numerical advantage in parliament limits the scope for opposition to alter the outcome through legislative means alone.
At the broader institutional level, the amendment illustrates the extent to which Hungary’s constitutional framework can be reshaped through parliamentary action when a supermajority is in place. The use of a constitutional amendment to end a sitting President’s term — rather than an impeachment or recall process — is an approach that legal scholars and constitutional observers are likely to examine in the context of comparative constitutional law.
However, it must be noted that with the election of Peter Magyar as Hungary’s Prime Minister, the nation has experienced quick changes in its political stance. For example, Hungary has, under Magyar, agreed to the European Union funneling more funds to Ukraine, which is a sharp break with its former stance. Also, Hungary has received access to more European Union funds, raising questions about whether Magyar is moving too quickly to align with supranational interests, in contrast to national interests. WIth the current amendment, another move is made to remove barriers within national politics.
