匈牙利的民粹主义与法律-特刊导言

IF 0.5 4区 社会学 Q3 LAW Review of Central and East European Law Pub Date : 2022-03-08 DOI:10.1163/15730352-bja10058
Tamás Hoffmann, Fruzsina Gárdos-Orosz
{"title":"匈牙利的民粹主义与法律-特刊导言","authors":"Tamás Hoffmann, Fruzsina Gárdos-Orosz","doi":"10.1163/15730352-bja10058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPopulism is a nebulous concept that has almost as many definitions as scholars engaging with the concept that has a paradoxical relationship with law. On the one hand, populist politicians generally oppose the liberal ideal of separating politics and law, i.e. accepting that legal rules should limit political power, claiming that it would impede the expression of the popular will, yet they use legal regulation as their most important instrument to implement their policies. The chameleonic nature of populism and its instrumentalist approach to law presents a special challenge for lawyers that try to assess its impact on the domestic legal system. Populist legislation, after all, is seemingly indistinguishable from legislation adopted under non-populist regimes as populist regimes always claim to strictly adhere to formal procedural requirements and often justify the dramatic overhaul of previous rules invoking foreign examples.\nHungary is a perfect litmus test for the examination of legal changes under populist leaders, because in 2010 the right-wing Fidesz-Kdnp party coalition won two-thirds majority in Parliament – a self-described “revolution in the voting booths” -, which gave it the power to completely overhaul the Hungarian legal system, even changing the constitution. In the past 10 years, virtually every significant branch of Hungarian law was recodified, adopting inter alia new criminal, civil, administrative and labor codes. The authors of this special issue attempted to analyze some of the most pertinent changes, in the field of constitutional law, adjudication, tax law, labor law, criminal regulation and asylum legislation.","PeriodicalId":42845,"journal":{"name":"Review of Central and East European Law","volume":"49 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Populism and Law in Hungary – Introduction to the Special Issue\",\"authors\":\"Tamás Hoffmann, Fruzsina Gárdos-Orosz\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15730352-bja10058\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPopulism is a nebulous concept that has almost as many definitions as scholars engaging with the concept that has a paradoxical relationship with law. On the one hand, populist politicians generally oppose the liberal ideal of separating politics and law, i.e. accepting that legal rules should limit political power, claiming that it would impede the expression of the popular will, yet they use legal regulation as their most important instrument to implement their policies. The chameleonic nature of populism and its instrumentalist approach to law presents a special challenge for lawyers that try to assess its impact on the domestic legal system. Populist legislation, after all, is seemingly indistinguishable from legislation adopted under non-populist regimes as populist regimes always claim to strictly adhere to formal procedural requirements and often justify the dramatic overhaul of previous rules invoking foreign examples.\\nHungary is a perfect litmus test for the examination of legal changes under populist leaders, because in 2010 the right-wing Fidesz-Kdnp party coalition won two-thirds majority in Parliament – a self-described “revolution in the voting booths” -, which gave it the power to completely overhaul the Hungarian legal system, even changing the constitution. In the past 10 years, virtually every significant branch of Hungarian law was recodified, adopting inter alia new criminal, civil, administrative and labor codes. The authors of this special issue attempted to analyze some of the most pertinent changes, in the field of constitutional law, adjudication, tax law, labor law, criminal regulation and asylum legislation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42845,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Central and East European Law\",\"volume\":\"49 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Central and East European Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-bja10058\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Central and East European Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-bja10058","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

民粹主义是一个模糊的概念,它的定义几乎和学者们研究这个与法律有着矛盾关系的概念一样多。一方面,民粹主义政治家普遍反对政法分离的自由主义理想,即接受法律规则对政治权力的限制,认为这会阻碍民意的表达,但他们将法律监管作为实施其政策的最重要工具。民粹主义的变色龙性质及其对法律的工具主义态度对试图评估其对国内法律制度影响的律师提出了特殊的挑战。毕竟,民粹主义立法似乎与非民粹主义政权下通过的立法难以区分,因为民粹主义政权总是声称严格遵守正式的程序要求,并经常为援引外国例子对先前规则进行戏剧性改革辩护。匈牙利是检验民粹主义领导人领导下的法律改革的完美试金石,因为在2010年,右翼的青民盟-国家民主党联盟赢得了议会三分之二的多数——这是一场自诩为“投票站革命”的选举——这让它有能力彻底改革匈牙利的法律体系,甚至修改宪法。在过去十年中,匈牙利法律的几乎每一个重要部门都得到了重新编纂,除其他外,通过了新的刑事、民事、行政和劳工法。本期特刊的作者试图分析宪法、审判、税法、劳动法、刑法和庇护立法领域的一些最相关的变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Populism and Law in Hungary – Introduction to the Special Issue
Populism is a nebulous concept that has almost as many definitions as scholars engaging with the concept that has a paradoxical relationship with law. On the one hand, populist politicians generally oppose the liberal ideal of separating politics and law, i.e. accepting that legal rules should limit political power, claiming that it would impede the expression of the popular will, yet they use legal regulation as their most important instrument to implement their policies. The chameleonic nature of populism and its instrumentalist approach to law presents a special challenge for lawyers that try to assess its impact on the domestic legal system. Populist legislation, after all, is seemingly indistinguishable from legislation adopted under non-populist regimes as populist regimes always claim to strictly adhere to formal procedural requirements and often justify the dramatic overhaul of previous rules invoking foreign examples. Hungary is a perfect litmus test for the examination of legal changes under populist leaders, because in 2010 the right-wing Fidesz-Kdnp party coalition won two-thirds majority in Parliament – a self-described “revolution in the voting booths” -, which gave it the power to completely overhaul the Hungarian legal system, even changing the constitution. In the past 10 years, virtually every significant branch of Hungarian law was recodified, adopting inter alia new criminal, civil, administrative and labor codes. The authors of this special issue attempted to analyze some of the most pertinent changes, in the field of constitutional law, adjudication, tax law, labor law, criminal regulation and asylum legislation.
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
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Review of Central and East European Law critically examines issues of legal doctrine and practice in the CIS and CEE regions. An important aspect of this is, for example, the harmonization of legal principles and rules; another facet is the legal impact of the intertwining of domestic economies, on the one hand, with regional economies and the processes of international trade and investment on the other. The Review offers a forum for discussion of topical questions of public and private law. The Review encourages comparative research; it is hoped that, in this way, additional insights in legal developments can be communicated to those interested in questions, not only of law, but also of politics, economics, and of society of the CIS and CEE countries.
期刊最新文献
Is Transparency Enough? Informal Governance Networks and the Selection Process of a Georgian Judge to the European Court of Human Rights Validity of Jurisdiction Clauses in Standard Terms and Conditions of International Commercial Contracts under Turkish Law Multiplication of Extraordinary Appeal Measures in Polish Criminal Proceedings: A Guarantee of Justice or Erosion of the Principle of Legal Certainty? Balancing Initial Copyright Ownership in Czech and Slovak Private International Law Accented Universality: Exploring Accountability as a Non-Translatable Concept in Central Asia
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1