滥用立法程序作为不自由工具包的一部分。匈牙利的情况

IF 1.5 Q1 LAW
V. Z. Kazai
{"title":"滥用立法程序作为不自由工具包的一部分。匈牙利的情况","authors":"V. Z. Kazai","doi":"10.1080/20508840.2021.1942366","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The Fidesz-KDNP coalition parties were voted into office in 2010 with a two-thirds majority in the unicameral National Assembly, which gave them significant leeway to implement their political agenda smoothly. Nevertheless, the governing coalition, driven by revolutionary zeal, was determined to put in place major legislative reforms as quickly as possible in the face of every opposition. This attitude led to the instrumentalization of parliamentary legislation which manifested itself in an increasing number of serious irregularities of the legislative process. This article argues that the procedural flaws of parliamentary law-making constitute an infringement of the rule of law principle as it is interpreted in the Council of Europe and the European Union. In order to show that the situation is much more serious in Hungary than the criticisms voiced by the European rule of law mechanisms suggest, we analyze all the constitutional review cases in which legislative acts were challenged on procedural grounds after 2010. Finally, we discuss the outcome of the cases adjudicated by the Hungarian Constitutional Court to see which irregularities were found unconstitutional.","PeriodicalId":42455,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Practice of Legislation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20508840.2021.1942366","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The misuse of the legislative process as part of the illiberal toolkit. The case of Hungary\",\"authors\":\"V. Z. Kazai\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/20508840.2021.1942366\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT The Fidesz-KDNP coalition parties were voted into office in 2010 with a two-thirds majority in the unicameral National Assembly, which gave them significant leeway to implement their political agenda smoothly. Nevertheless, the governing coalition, driven by revolutionary zeal, was determined to put in place major legislative reforms as quickly as possible in the face of every opposition. This attitude led to the instrumentalization of parliamentary legislation which manifested itself in an increasing number of serious irregularities of the legislative process. This article argues that the procedural flaws of parliamentary law-making constitute an infringement of the rule of law principle as it is interpreted in the Council of Europe and the European Union. In order to show that the situation is much more serious in Hungary than the criticisms voiced by the European rule of law mechanisms suggest, we analyze all the constitutional review cases in which legislative acts were challenged on procedural grounds after 2010. Finally, we discuss the outcome of the cases adjudicated by the Hungarian Constitutional Court to see which irregularities were found unconstitutional.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42455,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Theory and Practice of Legislation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20508840.2021.1942366\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Theory and Practice of Legislation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/20508840.2021.1942366\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory and Practice of Legislation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20508840.2021.1942366","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

2010年,在一院制的国民议会中,青民盟-KDNP联盟政党以三分之二多数票当选,这为他们顺利实施政治议程提供了很大的回旋余地。尽管如此,在革命热情的驱使下,执政联盟决心在面对每一个反对派时尽快实施重大立法改革。这种态度导致议会立法工具化,表现为立法过程中越来越多的严重违规行为。这篇文章认为,议会立法的程序缺陷构成了对欧洲委员会和欧洲联盟所解释的法治原则的侵犯。为了表明匈牙利的情况比欧洲法治机制提出的批评要严重得多,我们分析了2010年后立法行为因程序原因受到质疑的所有宪法审查案件。最后,我们讨论了匈牙利宪法法院裁决的案件结果,看看哪些违规行为被认定违宪。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The misuse of the legislative process as part of the illiberal toolkit. The case of Hungary
ABSTRACT The Fidesz-KDNP coalition parties were voted into office in 2010 with a two-thirds majority in the unicameral National Assembly, which gave them significant leeway to implement their political agenda smoothly. Nevertheless, the governing coalition, driven by revolutionary zeal, was determined to put in place major legislative reforms as quickly as possible in the face of every opposition. This attitude led to the instrumentalization of parliamentary legislation which manifested itself in an increasing number of serious irregularities of the legislative process. This article argues that the procedural flaws of parliamentary law-making constitute an infringement of the rule of law principle as it is interpreted in the Council of Europe and the European Union. In order to show that the situation is much more serious in Hungary than the criticisms voiced by the European rule of law mechanisms suggest, we analyze all the constitutional review cases in which legislative acts were challenged on procedural grounds after 2010. Finally, we discuss the outcome of the cases adjudicated by the Hungarian Constitutional Court to see which irregularities were found unconstitutional.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: The Theory and Practice of Legislation aims to offer an international and interdisciplinary forum for the examination of legislation. The focus of the journal, which succeeds the former title Legisprudence, remains with legislation in its broadest sense. Legislation is seen as both process and product, reflection of theoretical assumptions and a skill. The journal addresses formal legislation, and its alternatives (such as covenants, regulation by non-state actors etc.). The editors welcome articles on systematic (as opposed to historical) issues, including drafting techniques, the introduction of open standards, evidence-based drafting, pre- and post-legislative scrutiny for effectiveness and efficiency, the utility and necessity of codification, IT in legislation, the legitimacy of legislation in view of fundamental principles and rights, law and language, and the link between legislator and judge. Comparative and interdisciplinary approaches are encouraged. But dogmatic descriptions of positive law are outside the scope of the journal. The journal offers a combination of themed issues and general issues. All articles are submitted to double blind review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信