A hatalom forrása a nép?
Our Fundamental Law that entered into force on 1st January amounted to a host of changes in our legal system, one of which is Article B of the Foundation containing provisions on popular sovereignty with a changed wording. As such, this raises the question whether we should consider this modificatio...
Elmentve itt :
| Szerző: | |
|---|---|
| Testületi szerző: | |
| Dokumentumtípus: | Könyv része |
| Megjelent: |
2014
|
| Sorozat: | Szegedi Jogász Doktorandusz Konferenciák
4 Adásvétel és közösség = Sale and community 4 |
| Kulcsszavak: | Jogtörténet, Választójog |
| Tárgyszavak: | |
| Online Access: | http://acta.bibl.u-szeged.hu/74910 |
| Tartalmi kivonat: | Our Fundamental Law that entered into force on 1st January amounted to a host of changes in our legal system, one of which is Article B of the Foundation containing provisions on popular sovereignty with a changed wording. As such, this raises the question whether we should consider this modification as one that might result in changes within the practice relevant to the field of law subject to investigation. In order to reach a conclusion on this question, I chose the provisions of three Acts of Parliament in my research, as a starting point: the Act No. XX of 1919 on the Constitution of the People’s Republic of Hungary, and its consolidated version from after the Transition in 1989, and the Fundamental Law of Hungary. I highlighted those parts of these Acts that might serve as basis to conclude to what extent is the people – as a community – able to “make use” of their rights under the social contract, in other words, how can the people exercise these rights while representative democracy remains dominant. In my paper, I examine the actual legal provisions relevant to popular sovereignty, then move on to pertinent aspects of the right to vote and popular vote along with the adjacent issues of local autonomy and those of publicity relevant to the subject matter. It is interesting to compare the provisions of these three Acts given that these institutions that are fundamentally important have undergone change as a result of the modifications. Consequently, the opportunities of the people to exercise power might change; thus changes the content of the social contract. My paper is centered upon such questions and aims at discussing the problematic and coming to a conclusion as to how did the relation of direct and indirect representation change in the past 63 years? |
|---|---|
| Terjedelem/Fizikai jellemzők: | 155-164 |
| ISBN: | 978 963 306 328 6 |
| ISSN: | 2063-3807 |