Abstract
The study explores the difficulties of defining national minority, with a particular focus on the difference between the free assumption of identity and the free choice of identity, and the problems that arise from these. From a methodological point of view, the study puts a strong emphasis on a comparative legal approach, and in line with this, examines the regulatory (and where possible, enforcement) practices of the different countries. The study does not undertake a detailed explanation of the problems arising from the definition of the concept and the practice of identity choice, but it does, however, present the practice of indirect democracy in European countries, and, in this context, it also evaluates the dilemmas that have arisen in connection with the Hungarian legislation.
Keywords: comparative law, ethnic minorities, national minorities, parliamentary election, problems of national minority, representation
I. Problem statement
Hungary joined the European Union on 1 May 2004, which transformed the Hungarian institutional framework and also created the obligation for the Hungarian Constitutional Court to take its decisions not only in accordance with the Hungarian Constitution (Fundamental Law) but also in accordance with constitutional values based on common European traditions. In accordance with this obligation, from 14 December 2023, a ‘counterpart’ of this rule also appeared in Section 38/A of Act CLI of 2011 on the Constitutional Court (hereinafter: CC Act.). According to this provision, the Hungarian Constitutional Court shall, at the request of the Court of Justice of the European Union and in compliance with its powers under the EU Treaties, give a preliminary opinion on the compatibility with the Fundamental Law if the aspects listed in this Section of the CC Act are affected in the context of a case pending before the Court of Justice of the European Union and the interpretation can be directly derived from the Fundamental Law. Among these aspects [in points c) and e)], the questions of Hungary’s national identity and its inalienable right to dispose of its population are also defined.
[1] The findings of the study reflect the author’s own academic opinion and should not be considered in any respect as the official position of the Constitutional Court of Hungary. This research was carried out using the European Constitutional Communication Network (ECCN) database, within the framework of the research project of the Comparative Constitutional Law Research Group at the National University of Public Service, with the support of the AURUM Lawyers’ Club for Talented Students Foundation.