Tibor Navracsics: Hungary’s Constitution and Cardinal Laws – completing the political, institutional and intellectual renewal of Hungary

Tibor Navracsics is the Deputy Prime Minister of Hungary

I wrote for Conservative Home in November about Hungary’s democratic development.  This was partly in response to criticism that Hungary was backsliding on its commitment to European democratic values.  It is important that the wider conservative family should understand the changes we are making to Hungarian society and the reasons for them.

My argument was that there is no one standard democratic model.  Rather, there are many forms and variations around the world, all of which change and evolve continuously to meet contemporary challenges.  Had democracies been incapable of adapting to changing realities, this form of government would not have proved to be the most successful over the past centuries.

The responses to my article were varied and illuminating.  One question came up time and again.  It related to Hungary’s new constitution and, specifically, the "cardinal laws" that the Hungarian Government is currently enacting.  Conservative Home has kindly given me the opportunity to explain the purpose of these laws.

Tibor Navracsics: Why Hungary will remain a democracy among the democracies of Europe

Tibor Navracsics is the Deputy Prime Minister of Hungary

Is a country democratic if its most senior judges are appointed for life by a President on purely political grounds? Is freedom impaired if only two political parties ever hold power?

Is democracy compromised if a country’s electoral system is designed to deliver a majority for a single party and the demands of proportionality are deemed secondary?

Should we trust national politicians who speak of localism and yet preside over huge cities without elected mayors?

Is a country on the road to dictatorship if the President can bypass legislative procedure and enact laws via popular referenda?

All of the above examples are drawn from exemplary democracies that have set the standard for others in the world.  We are familiar with their traditions - and we instinctively recognise which countries they belong to.

With the consent of the Senate, the US President appoints justices to the Supreme Court on political grounds; while in Congress only Democrats and Republicans hold sway.

UK parliamentary elections are decided by first-past-the-post to the benefit of larger parties and the disadvantage of smaller ones. The recent AV referendum confirms that Britons are happy with the system, despite its lack of proportionality. And good luck to them!  My intention is not to criticise.