Márton Gerő's study is a critical analysis of various quantitative measurement tools on human rights, the rule of law and civil society. The first half of the paper presents the role of participatory rights, building on theories of civil society. The second half of the paper uses the example of some European countries to show how the analysis of the human rights situation changes when focusing on quantitative data reflecting the exercise of rights. It also proposes a method of measurement that focuses on citizen action.
The study of Zoltán Bretter tries to clarify a seemingly very antimonic issue: the author aims to analyze deeply the rule of law concept of German legal theorist, Carl Schmitt. According to the author the concept of the rule of law was not unitary in legal history. One of these theories, although not expansively accepted, is a politically determined rule of law concept which has natural law origin and this concept is what Bretter labeled as Carl Schmitt's theory on the rule of law.
Petra Bárd analyses a Supreme Court (Kúria) decision on a press article ironically criticizing the Hungarian state's migration and law enforcement policies and the corruption scandals of the prime minister's son in law which remained non-prosecuted. The journalist was sued for violating the dignity of the Hungarian nation, a provision which was added to the freedom of expression clause of the Fundamental Law by the infamous Fourth Amendment. The author criticizes how the Kúria has mistaken core political speech - government criticism - for violation of dignity of the Hungarian nation, and disregarded Hungarian and European standards on journalistic expression in general.
Through the analysis of the first post-Ilias and Ahmed judgment of the ECtHR in relation to the Hungarian land-border transit zones, András Léderer and Barbara Pohárnok highlight some of the key reasons why representatives of the applicants in the domestic proceedings decided to bring the case to the Court. By doing so, they also provide an insight into the working methods of human rights defenders in their attempt to remedy systemic violations of the Convention. Owing to the vulnerability of the applicants of the case as well as the material time of their detention in the transit zones, the authors are able to highlight most of the key shortcomings of the Hungarian asylum system and their dire consequences on asylum-seekers.
Ágota Szentes reviews the working paper Unity and Diversity in National Understandings of the Rule of Law in the EU compiled by numerous European contributors of the RECONNECT research project, aiming to defend the view that a consensual understanding of the rule of law has solidificated in the EU. In order to do so, the authors analyze the core meaning of the concept in the member states, focusing specifically on the aspects of its alleged uncertainty adduced regularly by the governments of Hungary and Poland. ■
Visszaugrás
