Following the April 2026 elections—which concluded with a record-high turnout of 80%, the defeat of Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party, and a two-thirds majority victory for TISZA—one of the first measures proposed by the newly formed government was the introduction of term limits for both the Prime Minister and Members of Parliament (MPs). The proposed reform would limit parliamentary mandates to a maximum of 12 years, although following the initial announcement an eight-year (two-term) limit was also discussed as a possible alternative. The primary justification is that spending too long in politics may weaken politicians’ connection to ordinary citizens, causing the pursuit of power to become more important than the representation of citizens’ interests.
As part of the Horizon Europe project TWIN4DEM, which examines the decision-making behaviour of parliamentary representatives, we compiled a database of all MPs serving in the Hungarian Parliament between 2010 and 2026. Using these data, we can explore how “sticky” parliamentary mandates are—that is, to what extent MPs remain in office from one electoral term to the next.
Between 2010 and 2026, there were 983 parliamentary seats across the four electoral cycles. The actual number of individuals serving was somewhat higher because some MPs resigned, died, or, in the most recent cycle, lost their mandates and were replaced. Counting each individual separately in every cycle in which they served, Hungary had a total of 1,046 parliamentary mandates during this period.
In reality, however, these 983 seats (or 1,046 mandates) were occupied by only 546 different individuals. Of these, 102 (19%) served in all four cycles, 56 (10%) served in three cycles, 74 (14%) served in two cycles, and 314 (58%) served in only one of the four cycles. Naturally, this does not mean that these individuals could not have served before 2010 as well. Moreover, many MPs left Parliament after the 2010–2014 cycle, when the number of parliamentary seats was reduced by almost half.
2014 marks a significant change, since the new Fundamental law decreased the number of MPs from 386 to 199. Of the 402 MPs serving between 2010 and 2014, 172 remained in the subsequent Parliament of 199 members. Of the 211 individuals who served during the 2014–2018 cycle, 161 also served in the next cycle. Similarly, of the 215 individuals who served between 2018 and 2022, 147 continued their parliamentary careers after the 2022 election.
This means that 43% of the MPs serving in 2010 remained in Parliament after the 2014 election despite the significant reduction in seats. At the same time, these returning MPs constituted 86% of the 2014 Parliament. Taking into account mid-term replacements, they represented 82% of all individuals who served during the 2014–2018 cycle.
The corresponding figures for later cycles were as follows:
| Electoral Cycle | MPs Also Serving in Previous Cycle (% of Seats) | MPs Also Serving in Previous Cycle (% of All Individuals Serving During Cycle) |
| 2014–2018 | 86% | 82% |
| 2018–2022 | 81% | 75% |
| 2022–2026 | 74% | 69% |
The data therefore point in two directions simultaneously. On the one hand, parliamentary turnover in Hungary is relatively limited: nearly half of all MPs served in all four electoral cycles. On the other hand, turnover has gradually increased over time. The 2014 Parliament was composed overwhelmingly of individuals who had already served in the previous Parliament, but this pattern became less pronounced in subsequent cycles. This may partly reflect the retirement of politicians who had already accumulated substantial parliamentary careers before 2010.
The 2026 election clearly represents a major break in this pattern. None of the 141 TISZA MPs had previously served in Parliament. Among the 52 members of the Fidesz–KDNP parliamentary group, now in opposition, 15 are newcomers, while one of the six members of the Mi Hazánk parliamentary group is entering Parliament for the first time.
Based on previous experience, however, one may assume that parliamentary office remains a relatively “sticky” position because obtaining a parliamentary mandate requires substantial resources. Whether the new term-limit regulation will substantially change this remains uncertain. Even under the new rules, the current cohort of 157 first-time MPs could potentially serve for up to 12 years, either continuously or with interruptions. Moreover, the historical retention rates do not suggest that significantly greater parliamentary renewal is likely from one cycle to the next. It should also be noted that there is no clear consensus regarding what constitutes an optimal level of turnover in parliamentary mandates. There may be advantages to representatives serving multiple terms, particularly when their continued re-election reflects successful representation of their constituents’ interests.
Article prepared by:
Csilla Zsigmond and Márton Gerő
ELTE Centre for Social Sciences