Maja T., accompanied by helmeted police officers in prisoner transport belts and handcuffs, enters the courtroom in District 5 of Budapest on October 8, 2025. One of the officers shouted “Free Maja!” Closed the window to stop the sloganeering. Which arose from a group of protesters.
Just another day in the trial of a suspected left-wing extremist who is accused of attacking and seriously injuring several suspected right-wing extremists in Budapest in February 2023.
According to the Constitutional Court of Germany, this case should not be held in Hungary. The German court in Karlsruhe ruled that insufficient checks had been carried out before extraditing German citizen Maja T. to ensure that detention conditions in Hungary would be humane – especially in view of the fact that Maja T. is non-binary.
Petra Bard, a legal expert at the Central European University (CEU) in Budapest, says the Constitutional Court’s decision also hints at doubts about whether Maja T can expect a fair trial. “It’s an open question, both because of their gender identity and because of the way the case has been politicized.”
‘Fear the worst’
As a result, Maja T.’s family and friends are extremely worried. His father Wolfram Jarosz told DW that what he “fears most” about the case is how fair the trial will be — especially now, since Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban recently declared the anti-fascist movement Antifa a terrorist organization. From a purely legal perspective, this has no bearing on the litigation already underway. However, Jarosh is confident: “You can see that he is applying pressure, that Maja will ultimately be given a very harsh punishment.”
Background: In February 2023, a group of left-wing extremists, known as the Autonomists, ambushed a group of suspected neo-Nazis in Budapest and attacked them with metal rods and hammers, leaving some seriously injured. Several people were arrested in both Hungary and Germany on suspicion of involvement in the attack, and some cases against them are still pending in both countries.
A verdict in Maja T.’s case is not expected until January. Until then, they remain in pre-trial detention, where, according to their father, they are forced to endure isolation and abusive treatment. Applications to transfer Maja to house arrest have so far been rejected.
Same charge, different circumstances
If convicted in Hungary, Maja T faces a lengthy prison sentence. In contrast, European Parliament member Ilaria Sallis, who is also accused of involvement in the crime, will not face any legal consequences, at least for now. On October 7, the European Parliament rejected Hungarian prosecutors’ demand that it lift the leftist Italian politician’s immunity.
The result follows the recommendation of the Parliamentary Legal Affairs Committee. It found, among other things, solid evidence that the proceedings in Hungary were motivated by the intention to harm Salís’s political activities and were therefore opposed to a waiver of immunity.
Legally based political statement
Julia Pokesz, a lawyer at the Center for European Policy Studies (CEPS), a Brussels-based think tank, told DW that the vote was extremely close, 305 to 306, not least because it is debatable whether immunity also applies to actions taken before holding office.
The European People’s Party, the largest faction in the European Parliament, had publicly opposed maintaining Salis’ immunity – unlike the cases of Peter Magyar and Clara Dobrev. Two Hungarian opposition figures are also facing charges in their country.
Salis, a self-proclaimed anti-fascist, was arrested in Hungary in February 2023 on charges of grievous bodily harm. While in Hungarian custody, she ran for the Italian Alliance of Greens and Left (Allenza Verdi e Sinistra) in the 2024 European elections and was elected to the European Parliament in June of the same year. Due to the immunity he received as a result, he was released shortly after the election.
Protection from oppression or avoidance of responsibility?
According to Pokesz, the European Parliament’s vote in favor of his immunity is legally justified, even if it is a political statement: “I think it is a political message to the effect that they do not want to assist Viktor Orbán. Removing immunity would not be a good precedent, but it is certainly justified on technical grounds.”
Salis’ lawyer György Magyar told DW that the vote was a “triumph of justice” and that “his immunity was not lifted because he does not want to be subjected to repression because of his views.” His client is not trying to avoid responsibility for her actions, he said: “She does not deny being involved in certain acts of violence. Immunity is no way for her to escape.” Salis herself wants her trial to continue in Italy.
Terrorism allegations from Budapest
Budapest reacted with outrage to the votes in Strasbourg. For him and his government, there is no problem with Hungary’s rule of law – although the EU does not always agree.
In 2018, Brussels initiated proceedings against Hungary under Article 7 of the EU treaties, which could theoretically result in suspension of voting rights. But nothing has happened for years, and no changes are expected in the upcoming hearing on October 21, 2025.
CEPS’s Pozé said, “If there is one case where the application of sanctions under Article 7 would be appropriate, it is Hungary. But we have not even come close to that.” “Experience shows that this leads to nothing except further hearings.”
This article has been translated from German.