Suchergebnisse

The purpose of the study is to explain the evolution of regulations that resulted in minority rights for Romanians living in Transylvania in the pre-1918 period. The study analyses in detail the advancement of the idea of " nationalities" (in the meaning of national minorities) in the legislation from the last decade of the 18th century and presents the legal claims of the Transylvanian Romanians against the Habsburg Empire and the Hungarian Parliament. The authors present the Nationalities Act adopted in the 1848 revolution, but left without consequences, and examine the development of laws on minority rights during the legislative period following the Austrian-Hungarian settlement. The article discusses the grand debate on the act on nationalities, which took place in the Hungarian Parliament in 1868, and describes the later assimilation efforts by the majority lawmakers. The authors draw attention to the fact that non-Hungarian nationalities acquired a minority status only after the adoption of the Nationalities Act by the Hungarian state, which became a so-called majority state.

Fiume (current official name: Rijeka) became part of Hungary in 1779 as a "corpus separatum". At the time of the so-called provision, after 1870, the legal system of the port city developed in a special way. Although the Hungarian government took over the administration of the city again, this did not mean the automatic reception and application of the entire Hungarian legal system. Some Hungarian laws were not later enacted in Fiume. The article prepared on the basis of the conference lecture in Cluj-Napoca (Sapientia Hungarian University of Transylvania) intends to review the issues of legal interpretation of the applicability of Act XLIV of 1868 on National Equality by using descriptive method, taking into account legal history and legal theory aspects.

Regulation (EU) No 650/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council in matters of succession is based on the principles of uniformity and predictability. The succession procedure should be governed by a single statutory provision in each Member State, uniformly with regard to all types of property, in terms of quality of succession, provisions on the opening and place of the succession, ineligibility for inheritance, survivor's rights. The harmonization that has begun runs counter to the different national laws and regulations of the Member States, which will only be possible to approximate over time, but uniform rules would significantly facilitate and resolve the legal problems that arise in succession proceedings.

In my study, I explore the logical self-contradictions stemming from the legal category of the national minority and argue that the minority rights that create this category are unsuitable for resolving the fundamental existential paradox of minority status. Similarly to Sándor Makkai, I see the minority paradox in the lack of homeliness of the physical home. In my view, homeliness as a measure of social defaultness is a function of the consensus prevailing in society and thus is related to the legal order of the state hosting the minority. To resolve this existential paradox of ethnic Hungarians in Transylvania, I find it necessary to recognize the right to homeliness, which entails stepping out from the paradigm of minority rights.

The aim of the study and the related presentation was to analyze the rules of the Hungarian and Polish administrative procedures in relation to the client status of (minority) NGOs, especially those belonging to the Polish nationality, in order to draw conclusions and make recommendations in the administrative proceedings to develop and promote the participation of non-governmental organizations. The presence of these organizations, especially in cases where there is a conflict of interest and / or the presence of a large number of clients, can make a major contribution to increasing the transparency of the regulatory process, achieving the actual objectives of the regulatory process and exercising adequate social control. A comparison of the experiences of Hungary and Poland is made possible by the accession to the supranational legal order of the European Union, which started at a similar time, and by the harmonization processes and similar legal and social conditions. The research related to the lecture was supported by the Wacław Felczak Foundation, with a scholarship called "Jagello".