Transparency's Report Is Manipulation + Video

The report financed by the European Commission and Soros's network is a tool that the Brussels leadership has been building for years in order to circumvent Hungary in joint decision-making.

Photo: AFP/Martin Bertrand/Hans Lucas

The claim made by Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index that Namibia, Ghana, Senegal, Romania, or Moldova are less corrupt than Hungary is not true. In reality, Hungary’s level of corruption falls within the European middle range. The report, financed by the European Commission and the Soros network, is a long-established instrument used by the Brussels leadership to bypass Hungary in common decision-making processes. In times of danger and uncertainty, it is especially important to trust real facts rather than opinions presented as facts. For this reason, the Nezopont Institute refutes Transparency’s claims in five points and exposes the flaws in its methodology and operations:

1. The corruption perceptions index has nothing to do with the actual level of corruption

Contrary to media headlines, Transparency’s index does not measure the level of corruption. Instead of conducting its own research, it draws on thirteen other indices as data donors, which examine corruption only partially and according to differing interpretations.

2. Countries are rated by a biased, left-wing jury network

The country expert questionnaires used by these indices are completed by the same small group of individuals. The composition of this jury is politically one-sided and consists of members of the same left-wing international network. Moreover, some country assessments and Transparency itself cite each other in a circular manner.

3.  Reality: Hungary falls in the European middle range

Transparency’s government-critical narrative differs from public opinion. According to Eurobarometer, in 2009 the anti-corruption performance of the Gyurcsany and Bajnai governments was rated the fourth worst in Europe, yet Transparency still placed Hungary in the European middle range. In 2025, public assessment of the government matched the European average, while Transparency ranked Hungary last.

4. Transparency’s index itself raises suspicion of corruption

The main financial backers of Transparency International’s index are precisely the countries ranked at the very top of its list (Denmark, New Zealand, Sweden, and Germany). In addition, Transparency’s donors include the Open Society Foundations linked to George Soros, as well as the European Commission. Both use the ranking as a tool of political pressure against individual states.

5. Transparency is closely linked to the Tisza Party

Its experts, officials, and campaigns have long supported left-wing parties in Hungary. Transparency oversaw the overpriced renovation of the Chain Bridge, a project that raises the suspicion of corruption. The chairman of the supervisory board of Transparency International Hungary, Peter Akos Bod, personally participated in an event organized by the Tisza Party and consulted with the party’s expert team on its program. Meanwhile, Transparency International Hungary’s legal director, Miklos Ligeti, is an enthusiastic promoter of Peter Magyar’s asset confiscation initiative.

A methodological critique of Transparency International’s 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index is accessible at this link.