Cine apara libertatea si valorile de dreapta in Europa?

Chiar daca nu mai era nevoie de nicio dovada, “popularii” din PPE si PDL sunt orice altceva numai de dreapta nu. Valorile democratice sau libertatile cetatenesti le sunt straine, iar la nivel european isi apara reciproc jocurile murdare, nationaliste, lezand grav interesele tarilor pe care le reprezinta.

Este cunoscut faptul ca in Ungaria s-au produs transformari profunde si problematice in ultimii doi ani. Un partid ales de 53% dintre alegatori a castigat, doar datorita sistemului uninominal si neproportional, o pondere de peste doua treimi in parlament. O putere absoluta, deoarece in Ungaria modificarea Constitutiei nu necesita o aprobarea prin referendum.

De cand a ajuns prin intermediul uninominalului la aceasta putere asoluta, partidul FIDESZ, condus de Viktor Orban, a purces la schimbarea din temelii a Constitutiei si legilor.

Pentru prima data in istoria recenta a Europei, un guvern si un parlament sterg din Constitutie principii democratice, libertati si garantii universal acceptate, pentru care s-a luptat timp de secole in Europa, cum ar fi separatia puterilor in stat.

Ungaria a devenit un stat total politizat, in care nu mai exista functii publice sau institutii independente si necontrolate de partidul la putere. Separatia puterilor in stat a fost suspendata prin taierea atributiilor Curtii Constitutionale. Principii fundamentale, care garanteaza libertatea si egalitatea in fata legii a individului, au diparut.

Chiar acum doua zile vedeam o stire terfianta: in urma unei alte reforme legislative, in Ungaria se pot face arestari “preventive”, de pana la cinci zile, fara mandat judecatoresc, procurorii decid in ce instanta se judeca cazurile,  iar dreptul retinutuilor de a contacta un avocat este ingradit! Legi absolut demne de o dictatura, si care incalca orice principiu al unui stat de drept, si Conventia Europeana pentru Drepturilor Omului!

Recent, mai multi disidenti care au lupat impotriva regimului comunist inainte de 1990 au adresat o scrisoare deschisa  catre Hillary Clinton, sefa Departamentului de Stat (ministerului de externe) din SUA, cerandu-i sa intervina pentru a apara democratia atacata in Ungaria. Au existat si alte proteste ale societatii civile din ungaria, sau ale liberalilor din Europa fata de aceste evolutii.

La toate astea se adauga panoplia de legi, discursuri si diversiuni nationaliste, nefiresti, dar de asteptat pentru cei care au urmarit istoria recenta si ultima guvernare a FIDESZ-ului din perioada ’98-2002. Este vorba de intrumentalizarea deja  absolut penibila a minoritatilor maghiare din afara Ungariei in scopuri electorale si politicianiste, de exacerbare a discursului invrajbitor nationalist si, chiar mai grav, de reaprinderea criminala a revizionismului istoric.

In ultimele luni s-au produs chiar in Romania mai multe episoade binecunoscute, care tin de aceasta telenovela  abjecta de care nici romanii nici maghiarii nu mai au nicio nevoie.

As adauga doar un exemplu mai putin cunoscut in Romania: amplasarea de panouri cu “Ungaria Mare” si cu un mesaj revizionist fata de granitele Romaniei, Ungariei si Slovaciei, pe soselele frecvent tranzitate de romani imediat dupa granita, dinspre Oradea spre Debrecen.

Propaganda penibila -marca Fidesz si Jobbik- pe soselele din Ungaria

A ridicat cineva vreo voce de protest in fata acestei situatii alarmante pentru Ungaria si Europa? In Romania nu au facut-o nici “popularii” portocalii din guvern, nici ministerul de externe, nici presedintia. La nivel european, Viktor Orban a avut acoperirea “popularilor” Sarkozy sau Berlusconi, care-si doresc demult sa faca acelasi lucru in tarile lor, daca nu ar fi impiedicati de constitutii si institutii democratice puternice.

Acum trei zile, marti 5.7.2011, in Parlamentul European la Bruxelles s-a votat si adoptat o rezolutie care cere guvernului de la Budapesta sa revizuiasca Constitutia, astfel incat drepturile si libertatile individuale si separatia puterilor in stat sa fie din nou garantate. In plus, cere guvernului de la Budapesta sa lase diversiunile nationaliste, si sa respecte integritatea teritoriala a statelor in care se afla minoritati maghiare.

Cine a initiat si votat aceasta rezolutie? Liberalii din ALDE, social-democratii, si verzii europeni. Cine a votat impotriva si a pierdut? Popularii europeni din care fac parte pedistii.

Inca o dovada pentru faptul ca liberalii europeni sunt singura grupare autentica de dreapta din rindul partidelor europene,  singura care apara libertatile cetatenesti si principiile democratice universal recunoscute, in vreme ce “popularii europeni” acopera toate abuzurile in materie venite din partea guvernului Orban, si voteaza chiar impotriva respectarii integritatii teritoriale a Romaniei.

 

UPDATE:

Cititi va rog articolul din The Economist pe aceasta tema.

Citez: “Yet the rosy glow over the Danube may prove short-lived. Hungary’s presidency was marred by criticism of Fidesz’s new media law and constitution. Complaints about excessive centralisation of power are returning. Visiting Budapest last month, Hillary Clinton, America’s secretary of state, called for “a real commitment to the independence of the judiciary, a free press and government transparency.” Freedom House, an American-based lobby group, talks of “the most significant backslide in Hungary’s democratic development since 1989”. The Venice Commission, which advises the Council of Europe on constitutional matters, worries about “cardinal laws” in the constitution that require a two-thirds parliamentary majority to be changed. Some deal with economic matters such as pensions and public debt.

The European Parliament has asked the European Commission to review the constitution, saying it fails to protect basic rights. The Hungarian government rejects this as political mischief-making and says the watchdogs do not listen. Tibor Navracsics, the justice minister, invited the Venice Commission himself, says Mr Kovacs. “There were cardinal laws under the old constitution and there will be two fewer under the new one,” he insists.

Yet the doubts will not go away. When Wen Jiabao, China’s premier, visited Budapest recently all Tibetans in Hungary were called to the immigration authorities to have their papers checked. Anyone suspected of violent or organised crime, or abuse of power, can under a new law be held for five days without charge, and prosecutors can choose which court should hear their cases. Even judges say the new legislation may be unconstitutional; civil-liberties groups say it may breach Hungary’s international obligations.

Tags: , , ,

9 Responses to “Cine apara libertatea si valorile de dreapta in Europa?”

  1. Stefan Zoltan Marina Says:

    Daaa, cam asa gandeste si Mama-Rusia despre pretentiile revizioniste ale Romaniei. Nimic nou sub soare. Pana una-alta, din Ungaria, Franta, Italia (astea au fost date ca exemplu) nu le pleaca in masa cetatenii. Inainte de a vedea cat de curate sunt curtile/ograzile altora, poate ar fi mai bine sa facem curatenie in propria nostra ograda/curte. Ar fi mai folositor. Tot pana una-alta, Romania este cea mai murdara tara din Europa. La toate nivelurile.

  2. Rational Idealist Says:

    Despre situatia din Ungaria s-a aflat deja in jurul lumii – iata un citat din ultimul raport “Nations in Transit” al Freedom House:

    “Between its inauguration in May and the end of the year, the Orbán government appointed loyal party cadres to head key institutions; adopted a retrospective tax law and reduced the powers of the Constitutional Court after it attempted to strike
    down the legislation; drastically weakened labor protections for civil servants; summarily eliminated the Budgetary Council, tasked with the independent evaluation of the national budget; used individual members of the parliament to propose important laws, including constitutional amendments, to circumvent the
    stakeholder negotiations required for government-proposed measures; curtailed freedom of speech through the adoption of new media legislation; intimidated the judiciary by summoning judges to parliamentary hearings on cases related to the riots of 2006; changed election procedures to give the ruling parties an edge in the October municipal elections; and nationalized the savings in a system of compulsory private pension funds.
    In addition to these concrete steps, the government used problematic rhetoric and political symbolism during the year. The prime minister and other members of Hungary 237
    the governing parties declared the April elections to be a revolution at the ballot box” and the “closure of regime change,” comparing the ouster of the MSZP to the end of communist rule. The Proclamation of National Unity—adopted with votes of FIDESZ-KDNP alone—enshrined this version of Hungary’s recent history in an official document, which a subsequent presidential decree obliged all offices of public administration, services, schools, hospitals, etc. to display in a glass frame. The decree requested, but did not require, that the judiciary and municipal offices do the same. The conservative government also apparently aimed to neutralize the right-wing appeal of Jobbik by appropriating some of that party’s ideological fodder, such as ethnic Hungarian issues in neighboring countries; the 1920 Treaty of Trianon, which truncated Hungary’s territory at the end of World War I and continues to be regarded as an injustice by many Hungarians; and even more symbolic concerns like the restoration of the “Sacred Crown” concept, which had formed the basis of the country’s premodern constitutional framework. The government’s actions and rhetoric to date suggest that it intends to undermine liberal democracy in Hungary. While this effort should not be equated
    with an attempt to establish an outright dictatorship, it does appear to be aimed at reshaping the political, institutional, and constitutional framework to keep the Fidesz-KDNP bloc in power for the foreseeable future, and ultimately to move Hungarian society in a more conservative, corporativist-authoritarian direction.”

    Problema e ca Romania, cu un presedinte care face apologia aliantei cu Germania nazista din timpul razboiului mondial, nu prea e in pozitia de a da lectii cuiva sau de a condamna in mod credibil astfel de excese. Basescu a parjolit deja terenul pe unde a trecut si a otravit fantanile.

    • transildania Says:

      Foarte interesant acest raport Freedom House.
      Nu ma asteptam ca Romania, care prin actuala putere incerca sa urmeze “modelul” Orban, sa dea lectii Ungariei.
      Am vrut doar sa evidentez ca la nivel de Parlament European si de Partide Europene, liberalii sunt cei care apara libertatile cetatenesti fundamentale si principiile statului de drept.

  3. Transildania: Cine apara libertatea si valorile de dreapta in Europa? « Blogul galben al lui Gondolin Says:

    […] sursa: Transildania […]

  4. adrian Says:

    Cine crede ca democratia nu se poate pierde doar pentru ca o tara sau alta e membra UE cred ca are dovada vie. Eu ma tem ca insasi UE se va transforma incet incet intr-o viitoare uniune sovietica in care sistemul nu mai poate fi invins pentu ca cetateanul e deja prea furnica. Baieti destepti elvetienii aia ca nu se lasa atrasi de cantecele de sirena …
    Mie mi-a placut asta:
    D. whereas the constitution-making process lacked transparency and the drafting and adoption of the new Constitution was conducted in an exceptionally short time frame that did not allow sufficient time for a thorough and substantial public debate on the draft text; and whereas a successful and legitimate constitution should be based on the largest consensus possible

    Cica ca si la noi trebuie schimbata constitutia urgent, maine daca se poate, la fel cu reorganizarea teritoriala … Cum zice o eticheta de la Rezistenta Urbana : “parintii lor sunt frati”.

    • transildania Says:

      Da, exact ce se intentioneaza (si din fericire nu se poate) la noi: modificarea Consitutiei in regim de urgenta, fara dezbatere si daca se poate prin ordonanta de urgenta
      In ce priveste calitatea de membru al UE ca garantie pentru un regim democratic, se vede si in Ungaria Romania sau chiar Itlaia ca lucrurile nu stau asa. Cel mult in parlamentul european se pot adopta rezolutii care sa traga semnale de alarma, in rest fiecare tara trebuie sa-si apere singura principiile democratice.

  5. Stefan Zoltan Marina Says:

    In tinp ce noi purtam in carca (altfel, cum?) grija altora, Udrea cu al sau minister a mai sifonat un fleac de fo 2 mil. euroi. Cu ocazia meciului “secolului”. Adica, in termeni specifici, am mai incasat un “upercut” la vintre, ma rog, sub centura.

    O cugetare: diferenta dintre PNL si PDL este doar de o consoana. N – Nu! Acu’ noi. D – Da! Acu’ noi..Sau, te pomenesti ca coruptia (la fix cacofonia) a fost “descoperita” de pedelisti? Or fi, pedelistii, extraterestri? Sunt extraterestrii printre noi? Sa vezi comedie. In timp ce noi ne uitam in curtile altora ne invadara extraterestrii.

    Un gand: ferice de bulgari. De cand nu le mai “purtam grija”, ei bulgarii, ne-o luara binisor inainte.

    Un alt gand: ce-ar fi sa “ne luam” putin de polonezi? Nerusinatii! Au “furat startul”. Ca prea sunt la fo 10 ture de stadion (ca tot suntem “conectati la sport”) inaintea noastra.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: