Ádám EszterThe conference titled "Cutting Red Tape – Opportunities for Reducing Administrative Burdens at National, EU, and International Levels" – organised by the National University of Public Service on 12 March 2026 – provided a timely forum for addressing the systemic challenges of modern governance, culminating in a specialized scholarly panel focused on "Directions for Reducing Administrative Burdens in Hungarian Regulation; AI and Deregulation." Moderated by Dr. Szabolcs Szigeti, Associate Professor at the National University of Public Service, the session brought together distinguished experts to dissect the tension between traditional legal frameworks and the accelerating digital transition. The dialogue aimed to move beyond the superficial goal of simply "deleting rules," instead seeking a holistic modernization of the Hungarian administrative landscape that balances legal certainty with the disruptive potential of artificial intelligence. Dr. Szigeti set the stage by framing the discussion around the dual necessity of streamlining state procedures while ensuring that the protection of citizens' rights remains uncompromised in an increasingly automated environment.
Opening the substantive debate, Dr. László Péter Salgó, Head of the County Administration, offered a practitioner’s perspective on the evolution of Hungarian administration. He highlighted the significant efficiency gains achieved through the transition from a fragmented authority system to the current integrated government office model. In this context, Dr. Salgó argued that the structural foundations for a professional, customer-friendly administration are largely in place, particularly through the framework provided by the Code of Administrative Court Procedure. However, he posited that the primary administrative burden no longer resides in procedural law but in the "proliferation" of substantive legal rules. This fragmentation complicates the handling of a diverse economic landscape where authorities must simultaneously cooperate with major German and Far Eastern investor groups alongside domestic capital. The challenge, therefore, lies in harmonizing this complex body of law to prevent authorities from operating in isolation, which historically led to the refusal of inter-agency recognition and the unnecessary stagnation of large-scale investments.
Dr. Salgó further observed that the true realization of efficiency is as much a psychological endeavor as a legislative one. He identified a persistent "office mentality" – the deep-seated resistance to change encapsulated by the phrase "that’s how we’ve always done it" – as a primary barrier to reform. Even with the introduction of sophisticated data-sharing systems and digital tools, the inherent inertia of bureaucratic habits can override the benefits of modernization. For technological development to dismantle these barriers, there must be a fundamental recalibration of the administrative mindset. Dr. Salgó maintained that while the transition period may involve short-term inconveniences and the struggle of adapting to new digital routines, these must be endured to achieve a future where administrative processes, from issuing an ID card to managing industrial permits, are handled with logical uniformity and transparency.
Expanding the conversation into the theoretical and interdisciplinary realm, Dr. Balázs Gerencsér, Associate Professor at Pázmány Péter Catholic University, shared insights from his current research into the operation of state registries. He introduced the vivid metaphor of a "balanced triangular tray" to conceptualize the precarious task of modern lawmaking. In this model, the legislator must maintain stability while three distinct corners of the tray are subject to constant pressure: the constitutional framework exercising control over executive power, international and European Union expectations necessitating non-normative adaptations, and the relentless pace of technological evolution. Dr. Gerencsér argued that reactive codification – merely responding to social or technical changes after they occur – is no longer a viable strategy. Instead, public administration must integrate the "experience of failure" from past legislative setbacks into a more proactive and stable model of legal evolution.
A critical component of this evolution, according to Dr. Gerencsér, is the revitalization of substantive impact assessments, which currently often oscillate between superficiality and overwhelming data-heavy complexity. To remedy this, he proposed that the depth of investigation should be determined by the specific subject of the regulation, potentially utilizing predictive AI systems – similar to those explored by the UN – to forecast regulatory outcomes and social impacts. Beyond technicalities, Dr. Gerencsér advocated for a radical "linguistic deregulation." He contended that the law must transition into a concise, intelligible medium that utilizes plain language to provide genuine guidance to practitioners and citizens. By adopting an "output-oriented" approach, the legal system can move away from a labyrinth of technical jargon and difficult-to-interpret norms, ensuring that the principle of clarity becomes a cornerstone of democratic legislative drafting.
The discussion gained further depth as Dr. Boldizsár Szentgáli-Tóth, Senior Research Fellow at the ELTE CSS Institute for Legal Studies, layered a constitutional perspective onto the tripartite model of regulation. He emphasized that every bureaucratic measure, however tedious, is ultimately intended to protect a fundamental right, making the quality and efficiency of regulation a significant constitutional concern. While acknowledging that digital solutions such as the ParLex system or Electronic Procurement Systems might initially increase the administrative burden during their implementation phase, he underscored their indispensability for long-term national competitiveness. Dr. Szentgáli-Tóth suggested that Hungary’s path forward lies in finding a "middle way" between rigid normative regulation and flexible soft law, ensuring that the legal system remains predictable yet capable of adapting to the rapid digitalization dictated by international frameworks and the European Union.
Turning specifically to the implications of the AI Act and artificial intelligence, Dr. Szentgáli-Tóth cautioned against viewing technology as a panacea. Instead, he framed the current restructuring of legislative packages as a strategic opportunity to shift the regulatory balance toward the identification of high-risk systems and the implementation of mandatory fundamental rights impact assessments. Drawing on international examples from Italy and Estonia, he demonstrated that while well-implemented digital solutions save immense energy and time, human control must remain the non-negotiable final point of decision-making. This is essential to prevent the legitimacy crises seen in other jurisdictions, such as the scandal in Brazil involving AI-generated legislation. He concluded that the integration of algorithms into public decision-making will only be successful if it is built on transparency and a coherent social attitude that preserves trust in the state's institutional integrity.
In a comprehensive summary of the panel's findings, it becomes evident that the reduction of administrative burdens is a multidimensional challenge requiring a confluence of structural, linguistic, and psychological shifts. The participants collectively illustrated a vision where successful deregulation transcends the mere deletion of redundant text and instead focuses on the creation of a coherent, "output-oriented" legal environment. This involves leveraging technology not as an end in itself, but as a tool to dismantle the "that’s how we’ve always done it" mentality and to bridge the gap between complex substantive law and practical reality. The session reinforced that while AI and digitalization offer unprecedented opportunities for efficiency, their application must be grounded in the protection of fundamental rights and the maintenance of human oversight to ensure long-term social acceptance.
Ultimately, the panel concluded that "cutting red tape" in the 21st century is a delicate balancing act – one that requires holding the "triangular tray" of lawmaking steady amidst global pressures. The modernization of the Hungarian administrative landscape must therefore proceed with a dual focus: utilizing advanced predictive systems and digital routines to simplify the lives of citizens and investors, while simultaneously safeguarding the transparency and predictability that define the rule of law. By fostering a mindset that values simplicity and clarity, and by treating law as an accessible medium rather than a technical barrier, the state can foster a more legitimate and efficient relationship with its citizens, ensuring that the administrative framework remains a facilitator of progress rather than an obstacle to it.
_________________________________________________________
This report was prepared with the support of the ELTE CSS Algorithmic Constitutionalism Lendület/Momentum Research Group (LP2024-20/2024), funded by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences.
_________________________________________________________
The views expressed above belong to the speakers and do not necessarily represent the views of the Centre for Social Sciences.