from PART III - MODERATE CRITICISM
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 December 2017
CRITICISM OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
INTRODUCTION
Hungary was the first country from the post-Communist bloc to join the Council of Europe and ratify the European Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter: Convention or ECHR) in November 1992; this remains a matter of national pride in spite of the growing number of condemnations from Strasbourg. The Convention was promulgated and thus became part of the Hungarian legal system through Act no. XXXIII of 1993 passed in April 1993. There is a broad consensus that joining the Council of Europe and the Convention system marked an important step in the country's striving for the Euro-Atlantic integration, and this position has not changed even if the critical voices about the interpretation followed by the European Court of Human Rights (hereinaft er: ECtHR) have become louder. The Council of Europe is still perceived “as an organisation demonstrating a clear political and ideological stand”, and “there are very few international organisations that have such clear and direct impact on the lives of people and citizens than the European Court of Human Rights”.
The recent constitutional reform has left the status of the Convention in the Hungarian legal system largely untouched. Similarly to the previous Constitution, the new Fundamental Law adheres to a dualist system: while “the generally recognised rules of international law” automatically – by virtue of Article Q (2) – become part of the legal system, treaties, such as the Convention, need to be transposed by an Act of Parliament. The domestic legal order “is rather friendly towards international treaties”. Laws are silent on the hierarchy between the Fundamental Law and international treaties, the former merely postulates that “Hungary shall ensure that Hungarian law be in conformity with international law.” From the Act on the Constitutional Court the supremacy of the Fundamental Law seems to emerge, and duly promulgated international treaties – including the Convention – take precedence over any conflicting regulation.
OUTSIDE POLITICS: GENERAL NEUTRALITY
Since the ratification considerable efforts had been devoted to raising awareness on the Convention and the jurisprudence of the ECtHR among judges, practitioners and public servants.
To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.