Suchergebnisse

By analyzing the parliamentary debates of 1866-1867 on foreigners' (notably Jews) requests for naturalization and property rights, this article tries to identify the parliamentarians' answers to the following questions: On what grounds were foreigners accepted as Romanian citizens? How did the parliamentarians define the foreigner? What was required from a foreigner in order to become a citizen? The overall objective is to identify some major themes that preoccupied the representatives of the nation, circumscribed around the primordial character of the "union" and of "nationality", with a special focus on the solutions proposed by the liberals. The argument is that the Parliament, by its vote, instead of granting citizenship rights, merely established the conditions according to which one could become a Romanian. In other words, the Romanian legislators considered it to be of outmost importance to recognize the quality of being a Romanian, that is, a member of an ethnic body, and not to define citizenship as a legal membership. "To be a Romanian" was more of an ethnic belonging, a "given", than citizenship or civic loyalty, defined through political and civic rights. It seems that citizenship was crushed by the primordial character of ethnic loyalty and by the weight of the state as expression and guarantor of the Romanian nation. In engaging the parliamentary debates about naturalization, the article attempts, first, to draw more nuanced conclusions about the lately much-debated character of citizenship in Romania and Eastern Europe during the mid-19th century. And second, such an analysis may provide a better understanding of the nature of political representation during the same period.

This article reviews the importance of national interest in the context of democratic transformations. The Republic of Moldova has to define its national interests as an opportunity to demonstrate that it has committed itself to respecting the values of freedom and tolerance, to demonstrate that it is open to bilateral and multilateral dialogue and cooperation and it tends to become a reliable security partner also by that gaining more audience and credibility. Even if the national interests of the Republic of Moldova are of a regional character, because its political and economic potential is limited, so it can not claim global roles in the world arena, the national interests synthesize the trajectories on the basis of which the Republic of Moldova conceives its present and the future. In democratic transformations, the role of state power in contemporary conditions does not diminish, but vice versa complicates and increases. Regardless of the social model that our society develops on, the state is the most important instrument for increasing people's well-being, building civical and political activity as well as strengthening the sense of citizenship. Thus, the course and results of democratic transformations are to a large extent determined by the quality of state leadership. The national interest is a well known determinant of political behaviour which motivates and stimulates different actors to develop political goals, to take actions that address both the political sphere as well as other social spheres. Starting from the premise that we are still doomed to governments formed by coalition, we consider absolutely necessary for all political formations to place on the first place the national interest, democratic transformation, sovereignty, human dignity, rights and freedoms, and not the narrow interests of the party or group.

The Judge plays a decisive role in promoting respect for human rights. His activity is governed by the fundamental principles of the "rule of law" concept. The principle of separation of powers is a principle that any democracy, that wants to be real, must necessarily take it into consideration and implement it. Delimitation of powers is, broadly speaking, a different jurisdiction to establish institutional authority, and to exclude other forms of mutual intrusion than those permitted by law. At European level, the criteria and conditions of the judicial domain, and the judges, receive a broader notion, more complex. The structure of today's European Union is based solely on the rules of law. Rule of law is ensured through creation of Community law that is independent and uniform for all Member States. To ensure judicial protection of individual rights conferred by Community law, transparency is indispensable to national procedural law. Therefore, the national legislation must be put in harmony with European law and the national legislator is obliged to respect the decisions of the EUCJ, which decided that, in principle, the conditions imposed by national law will not have to render virtually the rights conferred by Community law. Any judge, seized within its jurisdiction, is required to apply the provisions of Community law and protect rights which are conferred to individuals, leaving all provisions inapplicable, possibly contrary, the national law, either before or after the Community rule. European law clearly reinforces cultural and legal national judge. Community law isn't a foreign law, it is an outside law. This law is proper to each of our States as its national law, but it also has this feature to be at the same time a common value for all.

The family, its formation, the relationships between man, woman, children and relatives, as well as the relationships with the rest of the community were filtered by the "village gossip". The need for a strong solidarity that was necessary in the unfriendly conditions at the time compelled the individuals to accept the cohabitation with other members of the family (including the extended one) and with the rest of the community. More often than not, the individual behaviour acquired the expression of the collective behaviour. Such an influence of the community was obvious in the traditional rural societies. However, in time, it became progressively diluted under the pressure of modernity.
We can see that there were deep changes as the area integrated to an economic circuit that would lead to imposing new mutations in several economic sectors. The economic development and the dissemination of non-agricultural activities associated to urban development whose influence went growing brought about alterations in the family relations. Then, there were mutations in the relationship between the family, the domestic group and the household resources. These changes were not obvious in all localities in the region: some of them were still anchored in the traditional as the new managed to penetrate more difficultly, while major changes on the level of the collective mental could not be perceived on a short span of time. Nevertheless, under the influence of modernity, society influenced the family not only in point of form, but also insofar as its role and functions were concerned. Mentalities changed together with the form and nature of society. Family was no longer big; it did no longer accept the interference of the relatives and even less that of the community. Changes were more visible in the city; however, once the social, cultural and economic changes, they became obvious in the countryside too. The nuclear family was the new family model where interference from the outside was insignificant.

The European Union is a rather new player in international relations. The European Union is neither a state nor international organization. With the accession to the European Union, the states transfer some attributes of sovereignty and, thus, the governing is done by the European Union mostly, taking part in its relations with third countries. At the same time, it contains some elements of the union (confederation, federation). Therefore, the European Union is more than an international organization. We find elements of the federation, confederation without being identified as such, being established on a system of organization. The European Union aims for integration of societies within a single economic, social, political, legal area. The European Union acts as a proper system based on an idea of creating strong Union bonds between the people of Europe, by establishing an internal market, an economical Union. The European Union, in its relations with the member states, keeps the ultimate goal that it has, being an international legal person, special competences, realizing common goals established with the member states. The legal basis of the European Union is represented by two treaties: the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The well-known Lisbon Treaty represents legally an amending treaty of the previous legal instruments - a compromise between the need for reform, on the one hand, and the need to live in a united Europe, on the other hand. The member states of the EU relate to two legal systems. As a result of their participation in an international organization with supranational character, Member States of the European Union assume a number of commitments with repercussions to their state sovereignty. The Member States coexist with the European Union. The European Union has become, along with its Member States, a matter of international law; even if it shows itself as a conglomerate of states - international organization; it is a union of states established by state attributes, an entity more complex and powerful, with a higher importance with its relations with the Member States, but also with an increased influence on international arena.

The last years of World War II have brought, per ensemble, complex problems for the "Regele Ferdinand I" University, which, after the Vienna Treaty of 1940, has been functioning in exile from Sibiu and Timişoara. From 1944 the model of the modern University of Cluj was brutally converted to an instrument of propaganda for a communist ideology, far fetched from its original nationalistic vocation. The period of transition from democracy to totalitarianism, 1944-1947, was marked by a series of events such as: the beginning of the process of politicization within the University of Cluj, the problems related to the foundation of "Bolyai" University, the return in 1945 of the University to its original sight from Cluj, the students strikes in January-June 1946, the university repression generally speaking, and particularly the repressions of students, and, last but not least, the debates of the University Senate concerning the politicization of the academic environment and the dismissal of some "compromised" members of the teaching staff. After 1944, the communists were interested in eliminating all political rivals, therefore the dismissal threats, followed by the contractions within the Departments of the University of Cluj, became a cruel reality between 1944-1948. Like all the other Romanian universities, the Cluj University began compiling "expurgation" dossiers for the so called "fascist" university professors, and substituting the old rectors and deans with new ones from amongst those who had adapted to the "new age". The public stand of the academics has gradually declined after 1944, when their life and activity has been brought to challenge, the changing values after March 1945 favouring the devotion towards the new regime, and praising less and less the academic fulfilment. On the background of "democratic" reforms, the new regime authorities have intensified the brutal isolation, especially of scholars among which a great number of university professors, by means of massive arrests. The most invoked reasons were: denigration of the power of the state, opposition to the construction of socialism, or the need to re-educate the "hostile" elements from within the Popular Republic of Romania.

The phenomenon we have tried to approximate in our work is that of Romanian inter-war spirituality. The "protagonists" of this research belonged to the so-called "young generation" or "generation 27", that is "The Criterion group": Mircea Eliade, Emil Cioran, Constantin Noica, Mircea Vulcanescu, as well as other two representatives of a different generation: Nae Ionescu and Nichifor Crainic.
The first chapter, entitled "Steps and traps in the perception of Romanian inter-war spirituality" stipulates the topic of our research. The novelty of the approach lies in our desire of deciphering the way in which these persons had perceived themselves and their role in what we are going to refer to as the great inter-war experiment. We intend to regard reality as the sum of various images, arising from different layers of perception, coming from the respective personalities, their critics and exegetes. These images overlap to an extent that does not justify the metaphor of a "mirror broken into pieces" and reconstructed; they merely form a sort of kaleidoscope whose images are recomposed in ever changing pictures every time the object one looks through revolves. In the same time, we make a starting point in an idea suggested by social psychology, which leads to our belief that the way in which the protagonists under discussion perceived themselves was defined by their representations on the events of the time, a sort of intellectual projection of collective consciousness.
We made clear some terms such as "post-event perception": the type of cognitive reflection upon a cultural background that occurs under the circumstances imposed to the subject, situated at considerable distance in time, capable of placing him in a favorable position – as the absence of subjectivism cannot contaminate direct, synchronic perception of events; possible reiteration of the moment achieved by means of reading, an experiment possessing the supplementary cognitive charge of an anticipatory knowledge of the denouement, as well as a series of disadvantages – such as the informational deficiencies caused by the passing of time, the reality of events being an indirect, secondary one; the contamination of hypothetical decisions and post-event judgments by the bulk and value of information on the events, as well as their subsequent evaluation, jeopardizing the accuracy of perception.
Evaluating the working hypotheses we notice that there is a considerable difference between the way in which we, who were not directly involved in the events, perceive the "epoch", and the way it was perceived by the persons whose intentions we are striving to decipher, together with the ideas and attitudes they shared, the people they came into contact with, the events they took part in or carried them along a sometimes disagreeable, often ungrateful History. Our protagonists observed that whatever culture consecrates or recovers is in possession of another type of reality. It is a relatively continuous reality; even if it becomes the subject of ever renewed evaluation, it constantly perpetuates a series of values, while history is anthropophagous, swallowing in an equally inconsiderate manner both geniuses and jesters, bringing together in its terrifying ignorance both illustrious characters and the most ordinary of all people.

The first elections to which the Romanians from all the united historical provinces took part were the parliamentary elections of November 2-8, 1919. The elections were held on the basis of the articles of a new electoral law that introduced the universal vote in the electoral practice in Romania. Thus, the Romanian rural area has become an attractive electoral basin for the political parties. Subsequently, the extension of voting rights for women also made the rural area a constant provider of votes for the candidates of political parties in both parliamentary and local elections. The first election exercise under the conditions of an extended electoral space was the local elections of February-March 1930, which were held in stages. On February 5, 1930 elections were held at the county level, and between February 9 and March 16, 1930 at the level of communes. In the communes with several villages the elections for the local councils took place on the days of 9-12 February, in the ones with a single village between 9-12, 16-19, 23-26 February and 2-4 March, and in the cities and municipalities on March 14 and 16, 1930. On February 5, 1930 elections were held for the Cahul County Council. But, the results and the way of conducting the elections were contested. On February 21, 1930, the local review committee of Chișinau admitted the contest against the elections of February 5, 1930 of the Cahul County Council and invalidated the respective elections. The Minister of the Interior Theodor C. Marinescu by his telegram from April 30, 1930 ordered the Local Ministerial Director III Chisinau to comply with the order of the Ministry of Interior no. 1972 of April 2, 1930 and to dispose, according to art. 388 of Law 167/1929 "the convening of the electoral body for the election of the Cahul county council, whose election was invalidated, necessarily until June 1, 1930". In the circumstances created, the Local Ministerial Director III Chișinau ordered the summons of the voters from Cahul county on June 1, 1930, to conduct the county elections. At the new elections on June 1, 1930, only three electoral competitors entered the race, with one less than at the February 5 elections: the National Peasant Party with two lists and the Liberal Party with a list. On the electoral lists for the participation in the county elections of June 1, 1930, 40,403 voters were included in the 15 polling stations. 24,153 voters participated in the elections, which constitutes 59.78% of the total number of those included in the lists. A considerable number of votes - 1,050, were canceled, and 287 declared void. The number of legally cast votes was 22,816. In the result of the election the electoral competitors obtained the following results: The National-Peasant Party, on both lists - 17,903 votes or 78.47% of the legally expressed votes and the Liberal Party - 4,913 votes or 21.53% of the legally expressed votes. The elections of June 1 in the Cahul county council were held under the conditions that the National-Peasant Party had achieved an absolute victory in the other counties of the country - 81.77% of the county councilors' mandates. The meeting to establish the Cahul County Council took place on July 27, 1930. The Cahul County Council elected, for a period of 5 years, as president of the Delegation of the county council the lawyer S. Botezatu, who obtained 19 votes out of 30. Members of the delegation of the county council were elected councilors V.Uzun, C. Rădulescu, Gh. Chirciu and A. Sprînceană. With the validation of the county councilors and the legal constitution of the county council's governing bodies, we can consider that the epic of elections for the county council in 1930 were completed.