In the closing article, Gábor Attila Tóth offers a twofold argument. First, despite all its shortcomings, the 1989 coordinated regime change is a unique success story in the region. It resulted in revolutionary changes in the constitutional system. Second, there is a need again for a peaceful, revolutionary establishment of legitimate government, but without a revolution as such.
On 7, 8 and 9 June 2019, from Friday to Sunday, the Moldovan Constitutional Court delivered six rulings which were rather atypical, to say the least. The court ordered the dissolution of the new parliament and declared all parliamentary acts unconstitutional, then invalidated the nomination of the new prime minister and the appointment of the government, and lastly, removed the Moldovan president from office and replaced him with the former prime minister as interim president. One week later, however, the situation became even more bizarre when the court announced a new judgment repealing each of its six rulings. What was going on in Chișinău and why?
Does pure majoritarian decision making have intrinsic value or offer better consequences for society? The case of Hungary is not isolated but is an integral part of a global phenomenon. In contrast with earlier waves of democratization that spread across the globe, more recent tendencies have led to the disintegration of democracies. Not only Hungary and Poland (two EU Member States), but also Russia (probably the first regime of this kind), and many other countries from Azerbaijan to Venezuela epitomize this phenomenon, in which the country in question adopts — apparently in a democratic manner — a legal transformation that moves it ever further from, rather than toward, democratic principles. Given that today democracy counts solely as a legitimate constitutional system, the most salient new feature is that authoritarianism must play at being democracy.
The current refugee crisis in the heart of Europe recalls the crucial contrast between rational worry and phobia. The historic decision of the US Supreme Court in the case of United States v. Schwimmer may help us understand the nature of fear in constitutional theory and practice.
13. September 2025
Giovanni Capoccia
12. September 2025
Anne Peters
12. September 2025
Anne Peters