Fruzsina Gárdos-Orosz – författare

This book explores the relationship between populism or populist regimes and constitutional interpretation used in those regimes.

The volume discusses the question of whether contemporary populist governments and movements have developed, or encouraged new and specific constitutional theories, doctrines and methods of interpretation, or whether their constitutional and other high courts continue to use the old, traditional interpretative tools in constitutional adjudication. The book is divided into four parts. Part I contains three chapters elaborating the theoretical basis for the discussion. Part II examines the topic from a comparative perspective, representing those European countries where populism is most prevalent, including Austria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Romania, Spain, and the United Kingdom. Part III extends the focus to the United States, reflecting how American jurisprudence and academia have produced the most important contributions to the theory of constitutional interpretation, and how recent political developments in that country might challenge the traditional understanding of judicial review. This section also includes a general overview on Latin America, where there are also some populist governments and strong populist movements. Finally, the editors’ closing study analyses the outcomes of the comparative research, summarizing the conclusions of the book.

Written by renowned national constitutional scholars, the book will be essential reading for students, academics and researchers working in Constitutional Law and Politics.

Chapter 1 of this book is freely available as a downloadable Open Access PDF at http://www.taylorfrancis.com under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives (CC-BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

This book explores the relationship between populism or populist regimes and constitutional interpretation used in those regimes.

The volume discusses the question of whether contemporary populist governments and movements have developed, or encouraged new and specific constitutional theories, doctrines and methods of interpretation, or whether their constitutional and other high courts continue to use the old, traditional interpretative tools in constitutional adjudication. The book is divided into four parts. Part I contains three chapters elaborating the theoretical basis for the discussion. Part II examines the topic from a comparative perspective, representing those European countries where populism is most prevalent, including Austria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Romania, Spain, and the United Kingdom. Part III extends the focus to the United States, reflecting how American jurisprudence and academia have produced the most important contributions to the theory of constitutional interpretation, and how recent political developments in that country might challenge the traditional understanding of judicial review. This section also includes a general overview on Latin America, where there are also some populist governments and strong populist movements. Finally, the editors’ closing study analyses the outcomes of the comparative research, summarizing the conclusions of the book.

Written by renowned national constitutional scholars, the book will be essential reading for students, academics and researchers working in Constitutional Law and Politics.

Chapter 1 of this book is freely available as a downloadable Open Access PDF at http://www.taylorfrancis.com under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives (CC-BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

Emergencies are ubiquitous in 21st-century societal discourses. From the rise of emergency pronouncements in the United States since 9/11 accompanied by the associated violations of fundamental rights, through talks of ‘crises’ in the EU in relation to the economy, Putin’s occupation of Crimea (as recently amplified by the full-scale invasion of Ukraine) or refugees, to the long-neglected looming climate catastrophe, emergency discourses have been catapulted to the centre of attention by the critical juncture of the COVID-19 pandemic.

This volume presents and compares the existing regulations and practices of emergencies and human rights protection in the Visegrad (V4) countries. As such, the analysis covers Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia. Although these European countries share a common historical experience and are now members of the EU and NATO, they differ in some of their constitutional traditions and, also, in the dynamics of their political regimes. Divided into three parts, the first two comprehensively discuss the constitutional models of emergency and human rights protection in each of the V4 countries, while the third part illustrates how these models and the general framework of rights protection materialised in the limitations of the selected human rights during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The volume provides a compass for more in-depth, comparative, and interdisciplinary inquiries into the forms and practices of emergencies in one of the EU regions that faces illiberalisation and the consequences of the ongoing invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation on its eastern borders. It will be a valuable resource for academics, researchers, and policymakers working in the areas of Constitutional Law and Politics.

The Introduction, Chapter 7 and Chapter 10 of this book are freely available as a downloadable Open Access PDF at http://www.taylorfrancis.com under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives (CC-BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

Emergencies are ubiquitous in 21st-century societal discourses. From the rise of emergency pronouncements in the United States since 9/11 accompanied by the associated violations of fundamental rights, through talks of ‘crises’ in the EU in relation to the economy, Putin’s occupation of Crimea (as recently amplified by the full-scale invasion of Ukraine) or refugees, to the long-neglected looming climate catastrophe, emergency discourses have been catapulted to the centre of attention by the critical juncture of the COVID-19 pandemic.

This volume presents and compares the existing regulations and practices of emergencies and human rights protection in the Visegrad (V4) countries. As such, the analysis covers Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia. Although these European countries share a common historical experience and are now members of the EU and NATO, they differ in some of their constitutional traditions and, also, in the dynamics of their political regimes. Divided into three parts, the first two comprehensively discuss the constitutional models of emergency and human rights protection in each of the V4 countries, while the third part illustrates how these models and the general framework of rights protection materialised in the limitations of the selected human rights during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The volume provides a compass for more in-depth, comparative, and interdisciplinary inquiries into the forms and practices of emergencies in one of the EU regions that faces illiberalisation and the consequences of the ongoing invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation on its eastern borders. It will be a valuable resource for academics, researchers, and policymakers working in the areas of Constitutional Law and Politics.

The Introduction, Chapter 7 and Chapter 10 of this book are freely available as a downloadable Open Access PDF at http://www.taylorfrancis.com under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives (CC-BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

In the past few years, constitutional courts have been presented with new challenges. The world financial crisis, the new wave of terrorism, mass migration and other country-specific problems have had wide-ranging effects on the old and embedded constitutional standards and judicial constructions. This book examines how, if at all, these unprecedented social, economic and political problems have affected constitutional review in Europe. As the courts’ response must conform with EU law and in some cases international law, analysis extends to the related jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. The collection adopts a common analytical structure to examine how the relevant challenges have been addressed in ten country specific case studies. Alongside these, constitutional experts frame the research within the theoretical understanding of the constitutional difficulties of the day in Europe. Finally, a comparative chapter examines the effects of multilevel constitutionalism and identifies general European trends.

This book will be essential reading for academics and researchers working in the areas of constitutional law, comparative law and jurisprudence.

In the past few years, constitutional courts have been presented with new challenges. The world financial crisis, the new wave of terrorism, mass migration and other country-specific problems have had wide-ranging effects on the old and embedded constitutional standards and judicial constructions. This book examines how, if at all, these unprecedented social, economic and political problems have affected constitutional review in Europe. As the courts’ response must conform with EU law and in some cases international law, analysis extends to the related jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. The collection adopts a common analytical structure to examine how the relevant challenges have been addressed in ten country specific case studies. Alongside these, constitutional experts frame the research within the theoretical understanding of the constitutional difficulties of the day in Europe. Finally, a comparative chapter examines the effects of multilevel constitutionalism and identifies general European trends.

This book will be essential reading for academics and researchers working in the areas of constitutional law, comparative law and jurisprudence.

Features: 

Since the subject-matter of the volume is by its approach of constitutional change in populism is an unexamined one, neither a monograph nor an edited volume on the effects of populism on a specific legal institution, one already facing different external challenges (financial crisis, migration, security crisis, Covid-19 etc. issues), has been published so far. The book follows a unique approach in the framework of populist constitutionalism studies, because it combines the following features: 

focuses on one of the greatest contemporary challenges to constitutional democracies;

is authored by a pre-eminent scholar of Hungarian law;  

gives insight into the various problems of constitutional review, the transformation of the institution by constitution-making and legislation and its legal practice; and

contributes to the theories of and knowledge on the impacts of external challenges, especially those created by political systems, on the constitution and law by focusing on studying the transformation of the Hungarian Constitutional Court.

it provides additional information with high contextual value to the book edited by the author: Fruzsina Gárdos-Orosz, together with Kinga Zakariás, entitled: 30 Years of jurisprudence of the Hungarian Constitutional Court 1990-2020 (Nomos Verlag, Baden-Baden, 2022).

Benefits:

Because of the uniqueness of the topic of the book, its target group includes scholars and practitioners from all over the world who are interested in populism studies, comparative constitutional systems, and especially in Hungarian law and jurisprudence, as well as constitutional review. It will be an important reference, as it gives insight into the Hungarian ways of the legal treatment of the most urgent present-day challenges in the framework of populist constitutionalism. Both the various patterns of responding to the modern challenges and their analyses provided by this book should stimulate intensive academic discussion. University students of faculties of law and political science can also be interested in this book. Furthermore, judges, especially judges of constitutional courts and supreme courts could also be a target audience of the proposed book, due to the extensive relevance of the judicial dialogue in contemporary jurisprudence. Shared knowledge about the new methods of studying populist change, legislation and the reaction of the courts to it may be of wide interest. 

Keywords: constitutional review, constitutional justice in Hungary, Hungarian constitutional law, populism and courts, populism, illiberal democracy, Hungarian Constitutional Court, comparative constitutional review 

Author:

Fruzsina GÁRDOS-OROSZ

Fruzsina Gárdos-Orosz is director and research professor of the Institute for Legal Studies, Centre for Social Sciences and also professor of public law at the ELTE Law School in Budapest. She worked at the Hungarian Constitutional Court between 2003-2007 and 2010-2014 as law clerk in different positions. She has published extensively on the development of the Hungarian constitutional system, the constitutional complaint procedure and on the competence of the Constitutional Court. She has over 150 publications in Hungarian, English and French on the rule of law and the separation of powers, with regard to judicial review and the protection of human rights.

https://jog.tk.hu/kutato/gardos-orosz-fruzsina