Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T18:31:30.836Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Constitutional Trends in Eastern Europe, 1945–48

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2009

C. E. Black
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The constitutional development of the governments of eastern Europe in modern times has varied with the particular circumstances and personalities of each national group. Yet in its broader aspects this development has revealed a remarkably uniform pattern. The minority peoples of the Habsburg, Romanov, and Ottoman empires met the challenge of alien laws and discriminatory economic conditions in the nineteenth century by adopting as their program the political principles popularized by the French revolution. By the outbreak of World War I, Serbia, Greece, Rumania, Bulgaria, and Albania had achieved an independent status, and with the exception of the last-named had established a tradition of parliamentary government and the beginnings of a liberal democracy. A new era of opportunities and problems, inaugurated by the victory of the Allies in 1918, saw the creation of the enlarged Yugoslavia and Rumania, and of the new Czecho-slovakia. Two years later, with the stabilization of Russia's western frontier, Finland, the three Baltic states, and Poland were established as independent states. Albania and Bulgaria continued with modest changes of frontier and political outlook, and took their place beside a recalcitrant Hungary and a chastened Greece.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Review of Politics , Volume 11 , Issue 2 , April 1949 , pp. 196 - 201
Copyright
Copyright © University of Notre Dame 1949

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The constitutions of the inter-war period are discussed in McBain, H. L. and Rogers, Lindsay, The New Constitutions of Europe (New York, 1923),Google ScholarGraham, Malbone W. Jr, New Governments of Eastern Europe (New York, 1927),Google ScholarHeadlam-Morley, Agnes, The New Democratic Constitutions of Europe (London, 1929),Google Scholar and Zurcher, Arnold John, The Experiment With Democracy in Central Europe (New York, 1933).Google ScholarLippai, Z., Bor'ba Imperialistov v Dunaiskom Basseine [The struggle of the imperialists in the Danube basin] (Moscow, 1939), 69–155,Google Scholar is a standard Soviet interpertation. The texts may be found in Dareste, F.-R. and Dareste, P., Les Constitutions modernes (4 ed., 6 v.; Paris, 1928–1934),Google Scholar and Mirkine-Guetzévitch, Boris, Les Constitutions de l'Europe nouvelle (10 ed., 2 v.; Paris, 1938).Google Scholar

2 There is as yet no convenient collection of the texts of the new constitutions. The following is a chronological list of these documents: Constitution of the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia, January 31, 1946; Act I on the State Form of Hungary, January 31, 1946, and supplementary legislation; Constitution of the People's Republic of Albania, March 15, 1946; Constitutional Act Concerning the Organization and Powers of the Supreme Organs of the Republic of Poland, February 20, 1947; Constitution of the Bulgarian People's Republic, November 4, 1947; Constitution of the Rumanian People's Republic, April 13, 1948; Constitution of the Czechoslovak Republic, June 9, 1948. These constitutions will be referred to hereinafter by an abbreviated citation of the country, followed by the sections or articles in question. For general comments on these new constitutions, see Levchenko, I., “Features of the Post-War Constitutional Reforms,” New Times, No. 15 (Aug. 1, 1946) 3–5,Google Scholar and Gyorgy, Andrew, “Constitutional Developments in the Danubian Area,” Change and Crisis in European Government, Pollock, James K., ed. (New York, 1947), 17–28.Google Scholar The constitutions of Greece (June 1/14, 1911) and Finland (July 17, 1919) remain unchanged, while the Soviet-type constitutions adopted by the three Baltic states in August, 1940, lie outside the province of this paper. The constitutions of the five provinces of the Soviet zone of occupation in Germany likewise present a somewhat different problem. Their texts are included in Constitutions of the German Laender (Berlin: U. S. Office of Military Government, 1947), 97–161.Google Scholar

3 Stalin, Joseph, “On the Draft Constitution of the U.S.S.R.,” Selected Writings (New York, 1942), 381–82;Google Scholar for representative statements of the Soviet viewpoint, see Mitin, M., “Sovetskaya Demokratiya i Demokratiya Burzhuaznaya” [Soviet democracy and bourgeois democracy], Bol'shevik, XXIII, 6 (March, 1947), 23–43;Google ScholarMoshetov, V. and Lesakov, V., “O Demokraticheskikh Preobrazovaniyakh v Stranakh Novoï Demokratii” [On the democratic reforms in the countries of the new democracy], Bol'shevik, XXIV, 22 (11. 30, 1947), 38–52;Google Scholar and Korovin's, E. A. lecture on Osnovnye Printsipy Sovetskoï Vneshneï Politiki [Basic principles of Soviet foreign policy] (Moscow, 1947).Google Scholar

4 Alb.: Arts. 1–4; Bulg.: Arts. 1–5; Czech.: Fundamental Arts. I, III; Rum.: Arts. 1–4; Yugo.: Arts. 1, 6–8. In the case of Hung.: Art. 1, and Pol.: Art. 1, the term “people's” is not employed. For a Soviet interpretation, see Konstantinovsky, I., “The People's Democracies—A Fresh Breach in the Imperialist System,” New Times, No. 49 (Dec. 3, 1947), 3–9.Google Scholar

5 Vyshinsky, Andrei Y., The Law of the Soviet State, trans. Babb, H. W. (New York, 1948), 224.Google Scholar

6 Yugo.: Arts. 2, 9–13, 90–114; see also Petrovich, M. B., “The Central Government of Yugoslavia,” Political Science Quarterly, LXII, 4 (Dec., 1947), 504–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7 Czech.: Sects. 92–113.

8 For example, Alb.: Art. 13, and Bulg.: Art. 71.

9 Law No. 86, February 7, 1945, in Yearbook on Human Rights for 1946 (New York: United Nations, 1947), 248–49.Google Scholar

10 Fin.: Art. 14.

11 Declaration of Rights and Liberties, February 22, 1947; see also Rozmaryn, S., “La Question constitutionelle en Pologne,” Sociologie et Droit slaves, III, 2–3 (1947), 220–33.Google Scholar

12 Alb.: Arts. 12–36; Bulg.: Arts. 71–94 ;Czech.: Sects. 1–38; Hung.: Act. I, 1946, Preamble; Rum.: Arts. 16–36; Yugo.: Arts. 21–43. Some of the civil liberties provisions as of 1946 are included in the Yearbook on Human Rights.

13 Arts. 118–133.

14 Alb.: Art. 34.

15 Czech.: Sect. 37 (1).

16 Decree of June 13, 1946, Art. 32, Yearbook on Human Rights, 236.Google Scholar

17 Act VII, March 22, 1946, Arts. 1 (1), and 10 (1), Yearbook on Human Rights, 150–51;Google Scholar the fullest recent survey of the situation in Hungary is in Nagy, Ferenc, The Struggle Behind the Iron Curtain (New York, 1948);Google Scholar and for a Soviet opinion, Korotkevich, G., “K Vnutripoliticheskomu Polozheniyu v Vengrii” [On the internal political situation in Hungary], Bol'sherik, XXIV, 18 (09 30, 1947), 39–48.Google Scholar

18 Decree No. 899, December 30, 1946, Yearbook on Human Rights, 104.Google Scholar

19 The Trial of Nikola D. Petkov (Sofia, 1947), 517–615.Google Scholar

20 Sentenced to nine years hard labor on Oct. 8, 1947, see New York Times, Oct. 9, 1947.Google Scholar

21 Both sentenced to life imprisonment on Nov. 11, 1947, see New York Times, Nov. 12, 1947.Google Scholar

22 Alb.: Arts. 5–11; Bulg.: Arts. 6–14; Czech.: Sects. 146–164; Rum.: Arts. 5–15; Vugo.: Arts. 14–20. The Polish constitution contains several references to “the national economic plan” (Arts. 4, 7, 8, 28), but no explicit definition of the economic prerogatives of the state.

23 Stalin's address before the Tenth All-Russian Congress of Soviets, cited in Vyshinsky, , Law of the Soviet State, 102;Google Scholar see also Konstantinovsky, I., “Progressive Role of the Working Class in the Countries of Eastern Europe,” New Times, No. 28 (July 11, 1947), 3–10.Google Scholar

24 Alb.: Arts. 37–52; Bulg.: Arts. 15–33; Czech.: Sects. 39–62; Hung.: Act. I, 1946, Preamble, Art. 1, and Act VIII, 1945; Pol.: Arts. 2–11; Rum.: Arts. 37–40, 47–65; Yugo.: Arts. 49–72.

25 Vyshinsky, , Law of the Soviet State, 329–36.Google Scholar

26 Alb.: Arts. 53–58; Bulg.: Arts. 34–37; Rum.: Arts. 41–46; Yugo.: Arts. 73–76.

27 Czech.: Sects. 63–79.

28 Pol.: Arts. 12–16; see also Heyman, Casimir and Zalewski, Adam, “L'Organisation des Pouvoirs en Pologne,” Revue politique et parlementaire, L, 580 (July, 1948). 61–72;Google Scholar and Mikolajczyk, Stanislaw, The Rape of Poland: Pattern of Soviet Aggression (New York, 1948), 206–7.Google Scholar

29 Hung.: Act I, 1946, Arts. 2–17.

30 Arts. 126, and 141.

31 See, for instance, Djordjevié, Jovan, “La Skupstina constituante et le nouveau Système electoral,” Sociologie et Droit slaves, II, 2 (03–05, 1946), 122–48.Google Scholar

32 Bulg.: Art. 49, also Arts. 47–55; similar provisions are contained in Alb.: Arts. 67–74; Czech.: Sects. 123–133; Rum.: 75–85; Yugo.: Arts 107–114; in Poland the “national councils” are the subject of separate legislation.

33 Alb.: Arts. 57–66; Bulg.: Arts. 38–46; Czech.: Sects. 80–92; Hung.: Act I, 1946, Art. 13; Pol.: Arts. 17–19; Rum.: Arts. 66–74; Yugo.: Arts. 77–89.

34 Alb.: Arts. 89–91; Bulg.: Arts. 65–70; Czech.: Sect. 91; Rum.: Arts. 72 (par. 7), 73; Yugo.: Arts. 129–133.