Why Viktor Orban called a referendum on resettling refugees in Europe

“IF VOTING changed anything,” quipped Emma Goldman, an early 20th-century Lithuanian-American anarchist, “they would make it illegal.” Some Hungarians are starting to feel the same way. In the coming months they will be able to cast ballots in a referendum that is likely to aid the government and the ruling right-wing Fidesz party. Meanwhile, some pro-government supporters appear to have found a way to prevent a second referendum question that would be unhelpful to the government from reaching a ballot.

Viktor Orban, the Hungarian prime minister, announced on February 24th that Hungary will hold a vote on whether to accept the mandatory quotas for refugees passed by the EU last year. Mr Orban has been one of the continent’s most outspoken voices against accepting migrants. Under EU agreements, the decision to institute “relocation” quotas is binding, but Mr Orban said that doing so without consulting his nation’s citizens was “an abuse of power”. No date has yet been set, but the plebiscite should take place later this year. Mr Orban enjoys widespread support for his position, and the anti-refugee side is likely to win. But some wondered why Mr Orban made his announcement now.

The answer may be that he was trying to dominate the news after a less favourable referendum-related event. Early on the morning of February 23rd, Istvan Nyako, a politician from the opposition Socialist Party, was blocked by a dozen or so burly men from filing a request to the National Election Office for a referendum to allow shops to open on Sundays. Hungarian media claimed some of the men had worked for a security firm connected to a football club, Ferencvaros, whose president, Gabor Kubatov, is a vice-president of Fidesz (Fidesz denies any connection to the events, while Ferencvaros denies any connection to the men). Unable to enter the building, Mr Nyako missed his chance. Instead the National Election Office accepted a Sunday shopping referendum request from the wife of a former Fidesz mayor, which unlike Mr Nyako’s request had long and complex phrasing, and rather obscured the question. Mr Nyako told Bloomberg News: “This has nothing to do with democracy.”

The use of thugs to block Mr Nyako was “unprecedented” says Peter Kreko of Political Capital, a Budapest think-tank. “This goes beyond a line that the government side has not crossed before.” Writing in mandiner.hu, a conservative news website, Gellert Rajcsanyi slammed what he called a “revolting mockery of Hungarian democracy”. Hungarian officials deny any involvement with the events at the National Election Office. The government is willing to defend the shop closures at a referendum, they say.

Both events hint at the powerful resonance of referendums in Hungary. The country voted in them to join NATO and the EU. Some even trace Mr Orban’s return to power to his victory in a referendum held in 2008, when voters went to the polls over a proposal from the Socialist-led government to charge 300 forints ($1) for a doctor’s visit and to pay for hospital stays and a university education. Mr Orban led a campaign to vote no, and the electorate resoundly rejected the government proposal. The government, led by Ferenc Gyurcsany, never recovered its authority. Two years later, in April 2010, Mr Orban stormed to power with a two-thirds majority, rewrote the constitution, centralised political and economic power to a degree unseen since the collapse of communism.

Since then, Hungarian authorities have proved reluctant to let others use the power of a plebiscite. There have been none since the health-care charge, even though a dozen requests have been submitted on Sunday shop closure. The closures are deeply unpopular and any decision to overturn them would be a serious blow to Mr Orban. Distracting voters by whipping up anti-refugee feeling may be a deeply cynical ploy by Mr Orban—and might just work.