Representative of MVGYOSZ said that arranging the signatures of people who are unable to write due to their disability is a common problem, but in the case of the visually impaired this issue is more complex because a visually impaired person is also considered “unable to read”. It is an unfortunate experience that the change is not yet widespread in the public consciousness, she emphasised that it does not prevail in the administration of the government office, and even in the administration of the bank, a notarial form is still required from the clients. This means for the clients that, for example, a notarised contract is required for a mortgage registration, which costs the clients an additional cost of HUF 200,000. In such a case, MVGYOSZ turned to the Equal Treatment Authority (ETA), which found discrimination and condemned the financial institution.
It was emphasised that the technical conditions are given in all respects, the banks have had a tool (e.g. token) for the electronic authentication of the signature for 15 years, but it cannot be used for personal administration. It is not clear why electronic identification is a problem in other administrations if transfers can be made in e-bank. Personal e-ID card difficulties were also named separately. According to MVGYOSZ, another difficulty is that a personal appearance is required to use any electronic identification solution.
One of the participants emphasised that there is a fundamentally negative stigma attached to disability, and in their experience, signing and declaring a legal declaration is a marginal legal issue regardless of disability, therefore it is particularly difficult to resolve. She added that the lack of accessibility in some of the venues designed for customer reception is still a problem for customers with disabilities. Technical tools are available for the application of electronic authentication, and biometric authentication could even be introduced in the near future, as the technical conditions are in place.
Lawyer of MEOSZ said that the Civil Code does not specify what a signature is, but added that it is important to pay attention to guarantees when defining the concept, the use of a signature stamp can also be a concern.
Representative of MEOSZ indicated that based on the information received by MEOSZ and what was said at the previous workshop, the persons concerned do not use the electronic possibilities. This may not only be due to aversion to electronic solutions, but may also be due to a lack of the necessary tangible assets (e.g. eye mouse).
In connection with electronic authentication, One of the lawyers of MEOSZ highlighted that a card reader is required for personal e-ID card use and is less common. Customer gateway(ügyfélkapu) authentication does not require hardware, so she recommended the use of AVDH signature and epapir service instead of e-ID card. She stressed that under the law, any method of electronic identification can only be used if the person appearing in person has been identified with an identity card before it is issued. At the same time, she considered it a significant relief to have to appear in person only once and then to deal with countless official cases through the Customer gateway(ügyfélkapu).
The disadvantage of electronic identification methods is that the electronic document is not authentic when printed, therefore it would be important to create the legal possibility of a paper-based certified copy. Electronic documents prepared by state bodies and business organisations, when printed with the Postal Hybrid system, are also considered to be signed on paper. If this option were extended to private individuals, by uploading the document signed with AVDH to the Post’s Hybrid system, the postman could deliver an authentic document on paper, i.e. without a signature, within a few days,.
One of the participants indicated that an ombudsman’s report had been published on a similar issue for 3 years, when the service of return receipt documents was examined. His experience is that decision-making bodies have little information, issues arising in practice do not reach them, therefore she suggested that public bodies are informed in detail.
Representative of MEOSZ said that during the preparatory work, MEOSZ also informed the Deputy State Secretariat of the Ministry of Justice responsible for public and private law about the situation of illiterate people, the issues arising from the irregularity and the possibility of the present consultation. Based on the results and experience of the project so far, MEOSZ will turn to the Minister of Justice detailing the issues due to the lack of appropriate regulation and the harmonisation of legislation and in order to achieve legal certainty, find a solution to appropriate regulation for the written legal declaration of people unable to sign by involving affected organisations dealing with disability.