A pártok gazdálkodásának átláthatósága és az információszabadság érvényesülésének megvalósulása
It is not easy to create the optimal balance of data protection and data dissemination by operating a comprehensive system of precision and complexity, yet it is indispensable in a democratic rule of law. The delicate balance of data protection and freedom of information for party management is an everyday topic both in the literature and in the judiciary. Due to the democratic mechanism of the rule of law, the party’s transparency, including the enforcement of the freedom of information, is a relevant area to be investigated.
" ["hu_HU"]=> string(603) "Az adatvédelem és az adatnyilvánosság optimális egyensúlyát egy precíz és komplex rendszer működtetésével sem egyszerű megteremteni, mindazonáltal egy demokratikus jogállamban elengedhetetlen. A pártok gazdálkodására vonatkozó adatvédelem és információszabadság kényes egyensúlya mindennapos téma a szakirodalomban és a bírói gyakorlatban egyaránt. A demokratikus jogállam ellenőrzési mechanizmusából adódóan elsősorban a párt átláthatósága, így az információszabadság érvényesülésének megvalósulása a releváns és vizsgálandó terület.
" } ["copyrightHolder"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["prefix"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["subtitle"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["title"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(114) "A pártok gazdálkodásának átláthatósága és az információszabadság érvényesülésének megvalósulása" ["hu_HU"]=> string(114) "A pártok gazdálkodásának átláthatósága és az információszabadság érvényesülésének megvalósulása" } ["locale"]=> string(5) "hu_HU" ["authors"]=> array(2) { [0]=> object(Author)#761 (6) { ["_data"]=> array(15) { ["id"]=> int(2580) ["email"]=> string(19) "noreply@ludovika.hu" ["includeInBrowse"]=> bool(true) ["publicationId"]=> int(2353) ["seq"]=> int(0) ["userGroupId"]=> int(235) ["country"]=> string(2) "HU" ["orcid"]=> string(0) "" ["url"]=> string(0) "" ["affiliation"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["biography"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["familyName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(11) "Péterfalvi" ["hu_HU"]=> string(11) "Péterfalvi" } ["givenName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(6) "Attila" ["hu_HU"]=> string(6) "Attila" } ["preferredPublicName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["submissionLocale"]=> string(5) "hu_HU" } ["_hasLoadableAdapters"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataExtractionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_extractionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataInjectionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_injectionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) } [1]=> object(Author)#739 (6) { ["_data"]=> array(15) { ["id"]=> int(2581) ["email"]=> string(19) "noreply@ludovika.hu" ["includeInBrowse"]=> bool(true) ["publicationId"]=> int(2353) ["seq"]=> int(0) ["userGroupId"]=> int(235) ["country"]=> string(2) "HU" ["orcid"]=> string(0) "" ["url"]=> string(0) "" ["affiliation"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["biography"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["familyName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(8) "Horváth" ["hu_HU"]=> string(8) "Horváth" } ["givenName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(5) "Anett" ["hu_HU"]=> string(5) "Anett" } ["preferredPublicName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["submissionLocale"]=> string(5) "hu_HU" } ["_hasLoadableAdapters"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataExtractionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_extractionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataInjectionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_injectionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) } } ["keywords"]=> array(2) { ["hu_HU"]=> array(3) { [0]=> string(12) "adatvédelem" [1]=> string(18) "adatnyilvánosság" [2]=> string(22) "információszabadság" } ["en_US"]=> array(3) { [0]=> string(15) "data protection" [1]=> string(18) "data dissemination" [2]=> string(22) "freedom of information" } } ["subjects"]=> array(0) { } ["disciplines"]=> array(0) { } ["languages"]=> array(0) { } ["supportingAgencies"]=> array(0) { } ["galleys"]=> array(1) { [0]=> object(ArticleGalley)#773 (7) { ["_submissionFile"]=> NULL ["_data"]=> array(9) { ["submissionFileId"]=> int(7084) ["id"]=> int(1500) ["isApproved"]=> bool(false) ["locale"]=> string(5) "hu_HU" ["label"]=> string(3) "PDF" ["publicationId"]=> int(2353) ["seq"]=> int(0) ["urlPath"]=> string(0) "" ["urlRemote"]=> string(0) "" } ["_hasLoadableAdapters"]=> bool(true) ["_metadataExtractionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_extractionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataInjectionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_injectionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) } } } ["_hasLoadableAdapters"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataExtractionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_extractionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataInjectionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_injectionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) }A szentszéki strukturális és jogszabályi módosítások az európai migrációs válság fényében
Because of the current migration crisis, the central organisations of the Catholic Church were forced to reflect more directly upon the humanitarian, pastoral and policy aspects of the refugee issue. However, neither the annual speeches delivered by the pope at the annual World Day of Migrants and Refugees, nor other ad hoc communications by the representatives of the Holy See at multiple liturgical and diplomatic events led to any systematic legal and structural changes. These exhortations are not laws in the strict sense, instead they provide guidance to church organisations and a piece of advice for international and national authorities which must, by law, manage the whole migration crisis. The situation has changed with the emanation of a motu proprio titled Humanam progressionem at 31 August 2016, which led to the foundation of the new “Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development” inside the Vatican. This new document amended the governance structure of the Holy See and other relevant regulations. In this paper we focus on the historical and political background which motivated the legislator to modify the existing legal framework. We analyse the new law and the new administrative system in the context of current Canon Law and its influence upon the operations of other Holy See offices.
" ["hu_HU"]=> string(1331) "Because of the current migration crisis, the central organisations of the Catholic Church were forced to reflect more directly upon the humanitarian, pastoral and policy aspects of the refugee issue. However, neither the annual speeches delivered by the pope at the annual World Day of Migrants and Refugees, nor other ad hoc communications by the representatives of the Holy See at multiple liturgical and diplomatic events led to any systematic legal and structural changes. These exhortations are not laws in the strict sense, instead they provide guidance to church organisations and a piece of advice for international and national authorities which must, by law, manage the whole migration crisis. The situation has changed with the emanation of a motu proprio titled Humanam progressionem at 31 August 2016, which led to the foundation of the new “Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development” inside the Vatican. This new document amended the governance structure of the Holy See and other relevant regulations. In this paper we focus on the historical and political background which motivated the legislator to modify the existing legal framework. We analyse the new law and the new administrative system in the context of current Canon Law and its influence upon the operations of other Holy See offices.
" } ["copyrightHolder"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["title"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(105) "Amendments to the Governance Structure of the Holy See and Canon Law during the European Migration Crisis" ["hu_HU"]=> string(103) "A szentszéki strukturális és jogszabályi módosítások az európai migrációs válság fényében" } ["locale"]=> string(5) "hu_HU" ["authors"]=> array(1) { [0]=> object(Author)#745 (6) { ["_data"]=> array(15) { ["id"]=> int(2585) ["email"]=> string(19) "noreply@ludovika.hu" ["includeInBrowse"]=> bool(true) ["publicationId"]=> int(2355) ["seq"]=> int(1) ["userGroupId"]=> int(235) ["country"]=> string(2) "HU" ["orcid"]=> string(0) "" ["url"]=> string(0) "" ["affiliation"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["biography"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["familyName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(8) "Újházi" ["hu_HU"]=> string(8) "Újházi" } ["givenName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(8) "Lóránd" ["hu_HU"]=> string(8) "Lóránd" } ["preferredPublicName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["submissionLocale"]=> string(5) "hu_HU" } ["_hasLoadableAdapters"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataExtractionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_extractionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataInjectionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_injectionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) } } ["keywords"]=> array(2) { ["hu_HU"]=> array(3) { [0]=> string(10) "szentszék" [1]=> string(20) "migrációs válság" [2]=> string(7) "Európa" } ["en_US"]=> array(3) { [0]=> string(8) "Holy See" [1]=> string(16) "Migration Crisis" [2]=> string(6) "Europe" } } ["subjects"]=> array(0) { } ["disciplines"]=> array(0) { } ["languages"]=> array(0) { } ["supportingAgencies"]=> array(0) { } ["galleys"]=> array(1) { [0]=> object(ArticleGalley)#789 (7) { ["_submissionFile"]=> NULL ["_data"]=> array(9) { ["submissionFileId"]=> int(7092) ["id"]=> int(1504) ["isApproved"]=> bool(false) ["locale"]=> string(5) "hu_HU" ["label"]=> string(3) "PDF" ["publicationId"]=> int(2355) ["seq"]=> int(0) ["urlPath"]=> string(0) "" ["urlRemote"]=> string(0) "" } ["_hasLoadableAdapters"]=> bool(true) ["_metadataExtractionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_extractionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataInjectionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_injectionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) } } } ["_hasLoadableAdapters"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataExtractionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_extractionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataInjectionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_injectionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) }Just like it was the case with previous, similar polls organised by the government, the 2015 Hungarian national consultation on “immigration and terrorism” arose significant data protection related worries in the public opinion. Indeed, governments organising such consultations are given an opportunity to collect political data on their citizens, and store them into a database. Yet, such experiments in digital direct democracy are increasingly frequent. For example, last year, the French government launched a largescale Internet consultation on a proposed Bill on digital rights. This paper studies the compliance of Hungarian and French governmental consultation practices with data protection requirements, both legal and technical. Are the personal data of citizens handled in conformance with national and European regulations? This paper describes the tools and methods currently implemented to protect citizens’ political data in public consultations, and explores ideas derived from computer science and legal literature in order to improve the level of data protection in digital democracy.
" ["hu_HU"]=> string(1131) "A 2015-ös nemzeti konzultáció a „bevándorlásról és a terrorizmusról” adatvédelmi aggályokat keltett. Amikor a kormány a saját állampolgárait kérdezve közvélemény-kutatást tart, lehetősége van adatbázis készítésére, amelyben rögzíti állampolgárai véleményét. Az ilyen típusú konzultáció egyre sűrűbben fordul elő és egyre gyakrabban elektronikus úton történik. 2015-ben a francia kormány szintén indított egy nagyszabású internetes konzultációt az egyik törvényjavaslatáról. E tanulmány elemezni kívánja a magyar konzultáció adatvédelmi gyakorlatát jogi és technikai szempontok alapján, összehasonlítva azt a francia gyakorlattal. Mennyire felel meg a nemzeti, valamint európai jogszabályoknak a magyar és francia kormányok adatkezelési gyakorlata? Az elemzés kitér arra, hogy milyen eszközök vannak most használatban, hogy milyen fejlesztési lehetőségeket nyújtanak az információbiztonság új kutatási eredményei ahhoz, hogy minél erősebb elektronikus adatvédelmi szintet lehessen elérni az ilyen típusú konzultációk folyamán.
" } ["copyrightHolder"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["title"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(38) "Nemzeti konzultáció és adatvédelem" ["hu_HU"]=> string(38) "Nemzeti konzultáció és adatvédelem" } ["locale"]=> string(5) "hu_HU" ["authors"]=> array(1) { [0]=> object(Author)#770 (6) { ["_data"]=> array(15) { ["id"]=> int(2588) ["email"]=> string(19) "noreply@ludovika.hu" ["includeInBrowse"]=> bool(true) ["publicationId"]=> int(2359) ["seq"]=> int(2) ["userGroupId"]=> int(235) ["country"]=> string(2) "HU" ["orcid"]=> string(0) "" ["url"]=> string(0) "" ["affiliation"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["biography"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["familyName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(5) "Rossi" ["hu_HU"]=> string(5) "Rossi" } ["givenName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(6) "Julien" ["hu_HU"]=> string(6) "Julien" } ["preferredPublicName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["submissionLocale"]=> string(5) "hu_HU" } ["_hasLoadableAdapters"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataExtractionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_extractionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataInjectionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_injectionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) } } ["keywords"]=> array(2) { ["hu_HU"]=> array(2) { [0]=> string(21) "Nemzeti konzultáció" [1]=> string(12) "adatvédelem" } ["en_US"]=> array(2) { [0]=> string(21) "National Consultation" [1]=> string(15) "data protection" } } ["subjects"]=> array(0) { } ["disciplines"]=> array(0) { } ["languages"]=> array(0) { } ["supportingAgencies"]=> array(0) { } ["galleys"]=> array(1) { [0]=> object(ArticleGalley)#740 (7) { ["_submissionFile"]=> NULL ["_data"]=> array(9) { ["submissionFileId"]=> int(7095) ["id"]=> int(1506) ["isApproved"]=> bool(false) ["locale"]=> string(5) "hu_HU" ["label"]=> string(3) "PDF" ["publicationId"]=> int(2359) ["seq"]=> int(0) ["urlPath"]=> string(0) "" ["urlRemote"]=> string(0) "" } ["_hasLoadableAdapters"]=> bool(true) ["_metadataExtractionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_extractionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataInjectionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_injectionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) } } } ["_hasLoadableAdapters"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataExtractionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_extractionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataInjectionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_injectionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) }In 1603 James I became king of England, and started the Stuart dynasty. The Stuart dynasty never had the same charisma as the Tudor dynasty and never enjoyed the same popularity. He believed in the divine right of kings, he was willing to work with parliament but never as equals. “After his death, his son Charles I followed him. Charles I was a firm believer in the divine right of kings, and from the start he quarrelled with parliament like his father.” “Parliament had so much control at the time that neither James I nor Charles I successfully decreased the role of parliament in English government.” During the half of the 17th century differences between the king and the parliament sparked England’s civil war, which was the major turning point for absolutism in England. “Monarchs, beginning with Charles II, realized how much power parliament had and knew that they had to work each other.” It is the reason why “the parliament was so strongly ingrained into the English process of government, and was so centralized that parliament survived while absolute government died miserably. Parliament continued to gain powerover the king and become the leading governmental body of England.”
" ["hu_HU"]=> string(1221) "In 1603 James I became king of England, and started the Stuart dynasty. The Stuart dynasty never had the same charisma as the Tudor dynasty and never enjoyed the same popularity. He believed in the divine right of kings, he was willing to work with parliament but never as equals. “After his death, his son Charles I followed him. Charles I was a firm believer in the divine right of kings, and from the start he quarrelled with parliament like his father.” “Parliament had so much control at the time that neither James I nor Charles I successfully decreased the role of parliament in English government.” During the half of the 17th century differences between the king and the parliament sparked England’s civil war, which was the major turning point for absolutism in England. “Monarchs, beginning with Charles II, realized how much power parliament had and knew that they had to work each other.” It is the reason why “the parliament was so strongly ingrained into the English process of government, and was so centralized that parliament survived while absolute government died miserably. Parliament continued to gain powerover the king and become the leading governmental body of England.”
" } ["copyrightHolder"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["title"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(54) "Az angol parlamentarizmus története a 17. században" ["hu_HU"]=> string(54) "Az angol parlamentarizmus története a 17. században" } ["locale"]=> string(5) "hu_HU" ["authors"]=> array(1) { [0]=> object(Author)#797 (6) { ["_data"]=> array(15) { ["id"]=> int(2592) ["email"]=> string(19) "noreply@ludovika.hu" ["includeInBrowse"]=> bool(true) ["publicationId"]=> int(2360) ["seq"]=> int(3) ["userGroupId"]=> int(235) ["country"]=> string(2) "HU" ["orcid"]=> string(0) "" ["url"]=> string(0) "" ["affiliation"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["biography"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["familyName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(6) "Sághi" ["hu_HU"]=> string(6) "Sághi" } ["givenName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(14) "András Tamás" ["hu_HU"]=> string(14) "András Tamás" } ["preferredPublicName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["submissionLocale"]=> string(5) "hu_HU" } ["_hasLoadableAdapters"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataExtractionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_extractionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataInjectionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_injectionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) } } ["keywords"]=> array(2) { ["hu_HU"]=> array(2) { [0]=> string(11) "17. század" [1]=> string(14) "angol parlamen" } ["en_US"]=> array(2) { [0]=> string(12) "17th century" [1]=> string(21) "Parliament of England" } } ["subjects"]=> array(0) { } ["disciplines"]=> array(0) { } ["languages"]=> array(0) { } ["supportingAgencies"]=> array(0) { } ["galleys"]=> array(1) { [0]=> object(ArticleGalley)#774 (7) { ["_submissionFile"]=> NULL ["_data"]=> array(9) { ["submissionFileId"]=> int(7102) ["id"]=> int(1510) ["isApproved"]=> bool(false) ["locale"]=> string(5) "hu_HU" ["label"]=> string(3) "PDF" ["publicationId"]=> int(2360) ["seq"]=> int(0) ["urlPath"]=> string(0) "" ["urlRemote"]=> string(0) "" } ["_hasLoadableAdapters"]=> bool(true) ["_metadataExtractionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_extractionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataInjectionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_injectionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) } } } ["_hasLoadableAdapters"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataExtractionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_extractionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataInjectionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_injectionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) }Jakab András European Constitutional Language című, a Cambridge University Press kiadónál megjelent könyvét Könczöl Miklós magyar fordításában a Nemzeti Közszolgálati Egyetem adta ki az angol nyelvű megjelenéssel közel egy időben, 2016-ban (Jakab András: Az európai alkotmányjog nyelve. Budapest, Nemzeti Közszolgálati Egyetem, 2016, 453 oldal). Az alábbiakban a monográfia rövid ismertetésével arra hívom fel a figyelmet, hogy az tankönyvként is használható az alkotmányelmélet és az alkotmányjog oktatásában. Az alábbi sorok tehát nem a klasszikus értelemben vett recenzió műfajához igazodnak. Jakab András azt tűzte ki célul, hogy áttekinti, milyen fogalomkészlettel dolgozik ma az alkotmányjog, az alkotmányelmélet Európában, ezt a divatos fogalomkészletet hogyan lehet rendszerbe szedni és értékelni. Az átfogó célkitűzés végrehajtásából következik az, hogy tankönyvként jól funkcionál a kötet. A szerző az alkotmányjog és az alkotmányelmélet kapcsolatának meghatározását követően az alkotmányelmélet egyes kérdéseire fókuszál. Állítása az, hogy az alkotmányelmélet, az uralkodó alkotmányos tételek határozzák meg azt, hogy az alkotmányjog szintjén milyen konkrét szabályok jelennek meg a jogban,
és ezek hogyan érvényesíthetőek. A kötet három nagy részéből különösen az első kettő jelentőségét emelem ki az oktatás számára. Az első a jogértelmezés, alkotmányértelmezés szabályairól, a jog nyelvtanáról (és olvasásáról) szól, a második pedig a szókészletet vázolja, azaz azt mutatja be, hogy az alkotmányelméletben milyen, ma is uralkodó diskurzusok vannak, és ezeknek mik a történelmi gyökereik, mai jelentőségük. A kötet harmadik részében a szerző uralkodónak tekinthető felfogásokat kérdőjelez meg.
Jakab András European Constitutional Language című, a Cambridge University Press kiadónál megjelent könyvét Könczöl Miklós magyar fordításában a Nemzeti Közszolgálati Egyetem adta ki az angol nyelvű megjelenéssel közel egy időben, 2016-ban (Jakab András: Az európai alkotmányjog nyelve. Budapest, Nemzeti Közszolgálati Egyetem, 2016, 453 oldal). Az alábbiakban a monográfia rövid ismertetésével arra hívom fel a figyelmet, hogy az tankönyvként is használható az alkotmányelmélet és az alkotmányjog oktatásában. Az alábbi sorok tehát nem a klasszikus értelemben vett recenzió műfajához igazodnak. Jakab András azt tűzte ki célul, hogy áttekinti, milyen fogalomkészlettel dolgozik ma az alkotmányjog, az alkotmányelmélet Európában, ezt a divatos fogalomkészletet hogyan lehet rendszerbe szedni és értékelni. Az átfogó célkitűzés végrehajtásából következik az, hogy tankönyvként jól funkcionál a kötet. A szerző az alkotmányjog és az alkotmányelmélet kapcsolatának meghatározását követően az alkotmányelmélet egyes kérdéseire fókuszál. Állítása az, hogy az alkotmányelmélet, az uralkodó alkotmányos tételek határozzák meg azt, hogy az alkotmányjog szintjén milyen konkrét szabályok jelennek meg a jogban,
és ezek hogyan érvényesíthetőek. A kötet három nagy részéből különösen az első kettő jelentőségét emelem ki az oktatás számára. Az első a jogértelmezés, alkotmányértelmezés szabályairól, a jog nyelvtanáról (és olvasásáról) szól, a második pedig a szókészletet vázolja, azaz azt mutatja be, hogy az alkotmányelméletben milyen, ma is uralkodó diskurzusok vannak, és ezeknek mik a történelmi gyökereik, mai jelentőségük. A kötet harmadik részében a szerző uralkodónak tekinthető felfogásokat kérdőjelez meg.
Between 15 November 2016 and 1 February 2017, the Curia of Hungary rendered important decisions in respect of the following fundamental rights issues: right to respect for one’s reputation [Article VI, paragraph (1) of the Fundamental Law], right to have access to information of public interest [Article VI, paragraph (2) of the Fundamental Law], freedom of expression and freedom of the press [Article IX, paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Fundamental Law], the principle of equal treatment and non-discrimination [Article XV, paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Fundamental Law], entitlement to state pension [Article XIX, paragraph (4) of the Fundamental Law] and right to a fair trial [Article XXVIII, paragraph (1) of the Fundamental Law].
" ["hu_HU"]=> string(744) "Between 15 November 2016 and 1 February 2017, the Curia of Hungary rendered important decisions in respect of the following fundamental rights issues: right to respect for one’s reputation [Article VI, paragraph (1) of the Fundamental Law], right to have access to information of public interest [Article VI, paragraph (2) of the Fundamental Law], freedom of expression and freedom of the press [Article IX, paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Fundamental Law], the principle of equal treatment and non-discrimination [Article XV, paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Fundamental Law], entitlement to state pension [Article XIX, paragraph (4) of the Fundamental Law] and right to a fair trial [Article XXVIII, paragraph (1) of the Fundamental Law].
" } ["copyrightHolder"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["title"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(93) "Fundamental Rights Cases of the Curia of Hungary Between 15 November 2016 and 1 February 2017" ["hu_HU"]=> string(24) "A Kúria gyakorlatából" } ["locale"]=> string(5) "hu_HU" ["authors"]=> array(1) { [0]=> object(Author)#800 (6) { ["_data"]=> array(15) { ["id"]=> int(2594) ["email"]=> string(19) "noreply@ludovika.hu" ["includeInBrowse"]=> bool(true) ["publicationId"]=> int(2364) ["seq"]=> int(5) ["userGroupId"]=> int(235) ["country"]=> string(2) "HU" ["orcid"]=> string(0) "" ["url"]=> string(0) "" ["affiliation"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["biography"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["familyName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(6) "Berkes" ["hu_HU"]=> string(6) "Berkes" } ["givenName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(7) "Bálint" ["hu_HU"]=> string(7) "Bálint" } ["preferredPublicName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["submissionLocale"]=> string(5) "hu_HU" } ["_hasLoadableAdapters"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataExtractionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_extractionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataInjectionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_injectionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) } } ["keywords"]=> array(2) { ["hu_HU"]=> array(3) { [0]=> string(6) "Kúria" [1]=> string(23) "jó hírnév védelmét" [2]=> string(17) "sajtó szabadság" } ["en_US"]=> array(3) { [0]=> string(5) "Curia" [1]=> string(39) "right to respect for one’s reputation" [2]=> string(20) "freedom of the press" } } ["subjects"]=> array(0) { } ["disciplines"]=> array(0) { } ["languages"]=> array(0) { } ["supportingAgencies"]=> array(0) { } ["galleys"]=> array(1) { [0]=> object(ArticleGalley)#799 (7) { ["_submissionFile"]=> NULL ["_data"]=> array(9) { ["submissionFileId"]=> int(7108) ["id"]=> int(1512) ["isApproved"]=> bool(false) ["locale"]=> string(5) "hu_HU" ["label"]=> string(3) "PDF" ["publicationId"]=> int(2364) ["seq"]=> int(0) ["urlPath"]=> string(0) "" ["urlRemote"]=> string(0) "" } ["_hasLoadableAdapters"]=> bool(true) ["_metadataExtractionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_extractionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataInjectionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_injectionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) } } } ["_hasLoadableAdapters"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataExtractionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_extractionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataInjectionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_injectionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) }Az emberiességi szempontok figyelembevétele a menedékjog iránti kérelmek benyújtásával összefüggésben
This case-law review will present some important decisions adopted by the European Court of Human Rights between 16 November 2016 and 31 January 2017. In respect of Hungary, the judgments covered concern, respectively, the presumption of innocence allegedly infringed by the wording of a law on amnesty, the dismissal of the Vice-president of the Supreme Court, the shortcomings in the handling of an anti-Roma demonstration and the legitimate expectation of receiving disability benefits. The judgments against other countries were related to the following subject matters: the migration crisis following the “Arab Spring”, the expulsion of seriously ill persons, the investigation into forced labour, the lack of certainty in the domestic jurisprudence, the application of the lex mitior principle in sentencing, the removal of a child born as a result of a surrogacy arrangement, as well as the relationship between compulsory swimming in school and freedom of religion.
" ["hu_HU"]=> string(984) "This case-law review will present some important decisions adopted by the European Court of Human Rights between 16 November 2016 and 31 January 2017. In respect of Hungary, the judgments covered concern, respectively, the presumption of innocence allegedly infringed by the wording of a law on amnesty, the dismissal of the Vice-president of the Supreme Court, the shortcomings in the handling of an anti-Roma demonstration and the legitimate expectation of receiving disability benefits. The judgments against other countries were related to the following subject matters: the migration crisis following the “Arab Spring”, the expulsion of seriously ill persons, the investigation into forced labour, the lack of certainty in the domestic jurisprudence, the application of the lex mitior principle in sentencing, the removal of a child born as a result of a surrogacy arrangement, as well as the relationship between compulsory swimming in school and freedom of religion.
" } ["copyrightHolder"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["prefix"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["subtitle"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["title"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(75) "Fundamental Rights Cases – the European Court of Human Rights, Strasbourg" ["hu_HU"]=> string(70) "Alapjogi jogesetek – a strasbourgi Emberi Jogok Európai Bírósága" } ["locale"]=> string(5) "hu_HU" ["authors"]=> array(1) { [0]=> object(Author)#806 (6) { ["_data"]=> array(15) { ["id"]=> int(2597) ["email"]=> string(19) "noreply@ludovika.hu" ["includeInBrowse"]=> bool(true) ["publicationId"]=> int(2368) ["seq"]=> int(7) ["userGroupId"]=> int(235) ["country"]=> string(2) "HU" ["orcid"]=> string(0) "" ["url"]=> string(0) "" ["affiliation"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["biography"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["familyName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(8) "Mohácsi" ["hu_HU"]=> string(8) "Mohácsi" } ["givenName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(6) "Máté" ["hu_HU"]=> string(5) "Maté" } ["preferredPublicName"]=> array(2) { ["en_US"]=> string(0) "" ["hu_HU"]=> string(0) "" } ["submissionLocale"]=> string(5) "hu_HU" } ["_hasLoadableAdapters"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataExtractionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_extractionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataInjectionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_injectionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) } } ["keywords"]=> array(2) { ["hu_HU"]=> array(2) { [0]=> string(18) "Alapjogi jogesetek" [1]=> string(33) "Emberi Jogok Európai Bírósága" } ["en_US"]=> array(2) { [0]=> string(24) "Fundamental Rights Cases" [1]=> string(30) "European Court of Human Rights" } } ["subjects"]=> array(0) { } ["disciplines"]=> array(0) { } ["languages"]=> array(0) { } ["supportingAgencies"]=> array(0) { } ["galleys"]=> array(1) { [0]=> object(ArticleGalley)#807 (7) { ["_submissionFile"]=> NULL ["_data"]=> array(9) { ["submissionFileId"]=> int(7114) ["id"]=> int(1515) ["isApproved"]=> bool(false) ["locale"]=> string(5) "hu_HU" ["label"]=> string(3) "PDF" ["publicationId"]=> int(2368) ["seq"]=> int(0) ["urlPath"]=> string(0) "" ["urlRemote"]=> string(0) "" } ["_hasLoadableAdapters"]=> bool(true) ["_metadataExtractionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_extractionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataInjectionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_injectionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) } } } ["_hasLoadableAdapters"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataExtractionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_extractionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) ["_metadataInjectionAdapters"]=> array(0) { } ["_injectionAdaptersLoaded"]=> bool(false) }The Constitutional Court (CC) made 70 decisions between 1 January and 31 March. From these 70 decisions, there were 20 that examined the petitions on the merits. In 5 cases the CC found the decision of a body of law or a regular court unconstitutional. The CC made 1 decision in preliminary norm control, 1 in posterior norm control, 7 in judicial initiatives for norm control in concrete cases, and 60 in constitutional complaints. Most of the constitutional complaints submitted to the CC (50 cases) were against judicial decisions. In Decision 1/2017. (I. 17.) AB, the CC ruled on the petition of the President of the Republic, and found some provisions of the – adopted but not yet promulgated – Code of Administrative Court Procedure (CACP) unconstitutional. These provisions of the CACP had been adopted by a simple majority of the Members of Parliament, but they were found to be in collision with the Cardinal Act on the Organization and Administration of the Courts and with some other Cardinal Acts – which were adopted with the votes of two-thirds of the Members of Parliament present. In Decision 3/2017. (II. 21.) AB, the CC found the decision of the Curia unconstitutional. In this case a news site made recognizable photos of police officers while they were on duty, and the question was whether or not these photos can be published. The Curia ruled against the news site, and pointed out that the permission of the police officers is needed for the release of the photos, otherwise the right to privacy is violated. The CC ruled different: in its decision, the CC emphasized that until the picture is related to current events, and does not violate human dignity, it is protected by the freedom of the press, so it can be published. In another case, the CC reviewed the Curia’s decision about the status of a private road. The National Transport Authority and the Curia stated that the private road in question is opened to public traffic, even though the estate records were outdated and the Act on Road Traffic was unclear on this specific issue. The owners of the private road submitted a constitutional complaint to the CC, and in Decision 3012/2017. (II. 8.) AB, the CC found the Curia’s decision unconstitutional, because the Curia had not given adequate explanation
– based on the circumstances of the case and the law applicable – why the private road is considered to be open to public traffic, and not closed from it. The CC held the Curia’s decision to be contrary to the right to property.
The Constitutional Court (CC) made 70 decisions between 1 January and 31 March. From these 70 decisions, there were 20 that examined the petitions on the merits. In 5 cases the CC found the decision of a body of law or a regular court unconstitutional. The CC made 1 decision in preliminary norm control, 1 in posterior norm control, 7 in judicial initiatives for norm control in concrete cases, and 60 in constitutional complaints. Most of the constitutional complaints submitted to the CC (50 cases) were against judicial decisions. In Decision 1/2017. (I. 17.) AB, the CC ruled on the petition of the President of the Republic, and found some provisions of the – adopted but not yet promulgated – Code of Administrative Court Procedure (CACP) unconstitutional. These provisions of the CACP had been adopted by a simple majority of the Members of Parliament, but they were found to be in collision with the Cardinal Act on the Organization and Administration of the Courts and with some other Cardinal Acts – which were adopted with the votes of two-thirds of the Members of Parliament present. In Decision 3/2017. (II. 21.) AB, the CC found the decision of the Curia unconstitutional. In this case a news site made recognizable photos of police officers while they were on duty, and the question was whether or not these photos can be published. The Curia ruled against the news site, and pointed out that the permission of the police officers is needed for the release of the photos, otherwise the right to privacy is violated. The CC ruled different: in its decision, the CC emphasized that until the picture is related to current events, and does not violate human dignity, it is protected by the freedom of the press, so it can be published. In another case, the CC reviewed the Curia’s decision about the status of a private road. The National Transport Authority and the Curia stated that the private road in question is opened to public traffic, even though the estate records were outdated and the Act on Road Traffic was unclear on this specific issue. The owners of the private road submitted a constitutional complaint to the CC, and in Decision 3012/2017. (II. 8.) AB, the CC found the Curia’s decision unconstitutional, because the Curia had not given adequate explanation
– based on the circumstances of the case and the law applicable – why the private road is considered to be open to public traffic, and not closed from it. The CC held the Curia’s decision to be contrary to the right to property.