Hungary 1989
The 1989 revisions to Hungary’s 1949 constitution were part of the major wave of constitutional change that occured when the Soviet Union’s willingness to allow political liberalization in Central Europe became apparent.
Hungary had been one of the more progressive of the Warsaw Pact countries, allowing multicandidate elections in 1985 and permitting opposition associations to form in the late 1980’s. Representatives of the Hungarian Socialist Worker’s Party (HSWP) invited representatives of the Opposition Roundtable (a coalition of opposition parties) to secret talks in preparation for a formal roundtable between the government and the opposition.
Roundtable talks, which began on June 13, 1989, included three delegations: one from the HSWP, one from the Opposition Roundtable, and one representing a ‘third side’ of organizations such as the National Association of Trade Unions and the Patriotic Front, which had historically been associated with the HSWP. Negotiators agreed that constitutional deliberations would take place at three levels: plenary sessions open to the media, political negotiations between the groups, and expert negotiations on matters of detail. Decisions were to be made by consensus among the delegations. The roundtable was reached on an interim constitution in September, with two opposition parties choosing to abstain and initiate referenda to change those provisions of the agreement to which they objected.
Although the roundtable talks produced many agreements, the main legal authority for constitutional change was the existing HSWP-dominated parliament, most of whose 387 members had been elected in the 1985 multicandidate elections. This body was seen as unrepresentative, but there was a strong desire to proceed in a ‘constitutional’ manner. The members of parliament had developed some autonomy from the HSWP party. While it approved most of the roundtable agreement, it also changed provisions relating to the electoral law and human rights. The amendments were approved by the parliament on October 18, 1989 by a vote of 333-5, in excess of the 2/3 majority required.
There was no concerted effort to promote public participation during the process. Shortly after ratification, however, voters approved all four of the referenda initiated by the two opposition parties to overturn elements of the new constitution. Several other amendments were passed in the first five years. While the 1989 reforms were intended as an interim constitution, an attempt to write a new document in 1994-1995 failed. This process succeeded in enabling a peaceful transition from a single-party Communist to a pluralist political system.
There is no real indication that the lack of popular participation has hindered the legitimacy or effectiveness of the constitution. The ease with which the constitution can be amended has been both applauded and criticized by experts.