UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE
Global Security Fellows Initiative
Occasional Paper No. 5
Problems and Possibilities for Political Cooperation in the Carpathian Euroregion: The Role of Local Government
by
Dr. Izabela
Suchanek
October 1996
ISBN #1 900741 05 9
©Dr. Izabela Suchanek 1996
Introduction
Chapter
One: What is a Euroregion?
Chapter
Two: Trends in Political Relations Among the
Carpathian Euroregion Countries
Chapter
Three: The Structures of Self-government
Chapter
Four: The Possibilities for Cooperation
Chapter
Five: Conclusions and Recommendations
Following the changes of 1989, the former socialist countries began transforming not only in their internal systems, but also their foreign relations with other countries. After being directly dependent on the policies of the Soviet Union for more than 40 years, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe sought to exercise their own policies and control their own futures. As a result, the process of disintegration and division within the old socialist countries led to the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and The Council of Common Economic Assistance.
In its place, Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Poland started efforts, now fully underway, to become members of the European Community and NATO as soon possible. But dreams and reality are very often quite different. The EU has been cautious about welcoming the countries of Central and Eastern Europe with their under-developed economic and political structures still struggling to disengage from the socialist economic and political system. Membership in the European Union and NATO has been delayed. Instead, some of these former socialist countries have started to rebuild their relations with their former regional partners and neighbours.
The concept of active cooperation among the post-communist states of the Central Europe -- in particular, Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary (one is tempted to add Slovakia and Ukraine)-- is now taking shape slowly, but persistently. This cooperative effort is interesting to analyze, largely because it has two broad economic and political goals that it seeks to achieve before the year 2000: (1) regional economic and political cooperation for the first time since the disappearance of the Hapsburg empire in 1918; and (2) eventual economic, political, social and military integration with western Europe for the first time in history. The countries of the Carpathian region, for example, while continuing their aspirations for European integration are now more immediately seeking partners closer to home for transboundary cooperation.
Regional cooperation, however, must not be seen as an alternative to integration with Western Europe, but rather as an early first step and an enterprise which can help achieve this broader integration. It is important to this paper to keep in mind that this triangular strategy of cooperation -- among Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic -- is based on first creating regional cooperation that itself may in time lead to European integration and cooperation. Before then, however, there are lingering problems. First, there is a lingering fear and distrust of new forms of transboundary cooperation with old partners from the socialist period remain. We do not know each other very well, even though we are neighbours. Second, the issue of minorities persists. We do not like one another, neighbours or not. Can regional cooperation help overcome these obstacles?
Efforts to achieve regional cooperation form the core of this analysis. I am especially interested in conflict avoidance through efforts at cooperation between nations and states. Central Carpathian is examined largely because this is potentially a volatile area now experimenting with efforts to create transboundary regional cooperation through agencies of governance like the Carpathian Euroregion. Here are more than six major ethnic groups and three major religions, widespread unemployment, lack of development -- all of which make the Central Carpathian region "one of the greatest friction plates in Europe, with significant potential for both conflict and cooperation."
The countries sharing the Carpathian Euroregion -- Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania and Ukraine -- appear to have a similar strategy: to seek closer partners for regional cooperation. But, as this paper details, their goals like their politics may differ and this process will not be easy. At its heart is the difficult task of creating local self-government; of building a new civil society and new forms of governance. Even at the national level, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe still struggle at this writing to establish new forms of government -- new forms of democracy, if you will -- that allow citizens the right to govern themselves. Moreover, for countries long under the burden of centralised political and economic institutions, where decisions came down from above, the creation of local, transboundary forms of governance where choices and decisions may be bottom up, will be very difficult.
This paper contains four central themes. The first focuses on the political systems of four of the Carpathian Euroregion countries -- Slovakia, Ukraine, Poland and Hungary. Slovakia and Ukraine are building entirely new political systems as new states, unlike Hungary, the Czech Republic and Poland, at the same time that they proceed in transformation from the old political systems.
A second theme describes the political relations and connections among the Carpathian countries and the main problems that separate them. Contacts at the local level are one of the best ways of increasing cooperation among different countries and peoples. In these new political conditions, all of the countries of the Carpathian Euroregion will have to establish new systems of local authority and give them real opportunities to act freely. Self-government at the local level is the main structure for developing cooperation between the countries of the Carpathian Euroregion. For these reasons, I also briefly examine the newly-emerging systems of local government in the states of the Carpathian Euroregion. The fourth theme investigates the possibilities for cooperation among them.
For this research I used books and articles, original documents such as constitutions and different acts of law, and visited the Carpathian Region several times. During my visits I spoke with people from each of the four countries. We discussed together their problems and important affairs. My hope is that this publication will be helpful and useful to people interested in the development of democracy and political systems in the former communist countries. Perhaps it will enable them to understand better the main problems and issues of regions undergoing transformation and the issues and problems the peoples of those regions must address and solve.
Chapter One: What is a Euroregion?
"Euroregion" is the name given to an entity that seeks voluntary transboundary cooperation in economic, social, cultural and other issues between two or more states and their local and regional governments. It is usually a limited geographic area that straddles an international border and includes sections of the territories of two or more countries which have agreed to coordinate their activities across that border in various fields.
Euroregions began in Western Europe after the Second World War as a way of finding new possibilities of preventing the reoccurrence of conflict and of nurturing mutual cooperation among countries. Today, Euroregions exist across western Europe, although they are comparatively new to Central and Eastern Europe. They seek to play an important role in promoting mutual confidence and cooperation, and to serve as vehicles for European economic development and cooperation.
What is the Carpathian Euroregion?
The Carpathian Euroregion was started in 1993 with similar goals. It is the largest single Euroregion in terms of population (about ten million people) and size (104,989 km2). It covers five countries (Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Ukraine and Poland) and is, in the words of the Institute for EastWest Studies, "a microcosm of the new Europe, contining a potentially volatile mixture of nations and religions". International experts identified the area of the Carpathian Mountains and the Tisra River as one of enormous potential conflict, a former Yugoslovia awaiting a spark. As mentioned in Dr. Shepherd's Introduction here, the Carpathian Euroregion
is one of the greatest friction plates in Europe, with significant potential for conflict and cooperation. Furthermore, this remote and economically underdeveloped region has been largely overlooked by central governments and by Western assistance programs.
There are at least three principal dimensions to this volatility: ethnicity, religion and isolation. The entire region is inhabited by national minorities -- Ukrainians and Hungarians in Slovakia, Poles in Ukraine, Hungarians in Romania, Ruthenians in Ukraine and in Poland, and Romas (Gypsies) everywhere. The major religions -- Roman Catholic, Greek Catholic and Orthodox -- overlap and intermingle here. The area is geographically distant from the five national capitals and is considered undeveloped and unruly by its politicians. For this and other reasons, the governments of Slovakia and Romania have distanced themselves from the Carpathian Euroregion activities. Slovakia is only an associate member and refuses to allow its representatives to work out of Kosice in the Euroregion, but requires that they maintain an office in distant Bratislava. Although it would be welcomed to full membership status, Romania has asked that its representatives be included in Carpathian Euroregion work only as observers. The decision of Slovakia and Romania to became full members in the Carpathian Euroregion Association now depends on their governments.
The founders of the Carpathian Euroregion sought as one of their goals to diminish the opportunity for violence in the region. This might be done, they suggested, by seeking ways to overcome "some of the most explosive inter-ethnic, inter-religious and historical tensions" in the Carpathians. They decided that conflict prevention could be directly linked to the strengthening of transboundary cooperation by economic development and the formation of new regimes of civil society. That is, accelerated transboundary cooperation among the neighbouring states of Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Romania and Ukraine might become an instrument of conflict prevention. Steps toward this goal include "the creation of open societies where diversity is regarded with
tolerance. . ." and the creation of citizen associations with "bottom-up advancement of economic and political cooperation". In brief, a potentially volatile area might be made more peaceful by strengthening forms of local democratic self-governance and reversing decades of top-down planning and decision-making.
On February 14, 1993, the ministers of foreign affairs together with regional and local representatives of Ukraine, Slovakia, Poland and Hungary met in Debrecen, Hungary, and signed the founding documents of the Carpathian Euroregion. This marked the successful end to the process of creating a political, legal and organisational framework for interregional, transboundary cooperation. The Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs, Prof. K. Skubiszewski, said: "This initiative opens new opportunities for peace and cooperation at the area."
The organisational structure of the Carpathian Euroregion Association consists of the Council, the Secretary General, the Secretariat and the Working Commissions. The Council of the Euroregion is comprised of three representatives from each nation, for a total of fifteen members. Two representatives from each nation are locally elected representatives and one is from the state administration chosen on the basis of an internal agreement of each country. The Council meets every three months and discusses and ratifies joint projects of inter-regional co-operation to be undertaken by the Association and ensures their financing and implementation. All decisions of the council must be adopted unanimously.
The Secretary General is elected every two years by the Council and the position rotates among the members. He prepares and submits project proposals for approval to the Council. The Secretariat is an administrative body which organises the day-to-day operations of the Euroregion. The Working Commissions of the Carpathian Euroregion are responsible for addressing different problems of the region and coming up with specific recommendations on how to solve them. There are four Working Commissions which focus on economic development, environment and health care, cultural co-operation and tourism. These bodies consist of experts and meet once a month to discuss proposed projects. They act as lobbying bodies to the Council of the Euroregion.
Chapter Two: Trends in Political Relations Among the Carpathian Euroregion Countries
After the changes of 1989, the former socialist countries undertook transformations not only of their internal systems, but also of their foreign relations with other countries. For more than 40 years they were directly dependent on foreign policies generated by relationships with the Soviet Union, but since 1989 the need to be trully independent states exercising their own policies has been of central importance to these former socialist states. As a result, the Warsaw Pact and The Council of Common Economic Assistance were dissolved; they have to be replaced by other agreements seeking cooperation in the region.
The first steps after the collapse of the socialist system was a process of political and economic transformation that included disintegration and division within the former "socialist camp countries". Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Poland became interested in integrating with western Europe as soon as possible and made overtures to join the European Community and NATO, the western military alliance. But dreams and reality are very often quite different. The EU would not allow countries with underdeveloped economic structures and fragile political systems to join. With dreams of quick membership in the EU and NATO postponed, the countries of Central Europe started to rebuild relations with their former partners and neighbours, but on the basis of the principles of mutual benefit. All of the countries of the Carpathian Euroregion developed a similar strategy: to look for closer partners for transboundary cooperation.
Thus appeared the concept of active cooperation among the post-communist states of Central Europe, especially Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary. This type of international "triangular cooperation" was not seen as an alternative to integration with the west and the EU, but as an enterprise that might eventually assist this integration. With that concept in mind, the heads of state of these three countries met in Vishehrad, Czechoslovakia on 15 February 1991 to sign a pack of mutual cooperation. Although the Vishehrad "Triangle" (Czechoslovakia, Poland and Hungary) was not seen as a formal international body, there was hope that it would create a real base of cooperative development among the three countries to enable them to undertake the difficult path of economic, social and political transformation. In fact, they had much in common: similar economic systems, similar stages of transformation to democracy and free market economies, shared borders, and a comparative level of social-economic development.
When Czechoslovakia split apart, the "Triangle" was expanded to become the Vishehrad Group which included Slovakia. Cooperation within the Vishehrad Group is moving forward, albiet slowly, in such areas as policy, economics, defence, social issues (including the development of cultural contacts among people), environmental protection, transport and tourism. Defence agreements have been achieved concerning modernization of the armed forces of the countries, despite continued differences of opinion about entry into NATO. Better outcomes have been reached in the area of economic cooperation.
The process of rebuilding political and economic systems and the necessity of establishing free market economies are causing problems, however. Principles of cooperation were imposed on the countries of Central Europe during the former socialist period, and kind of fear and mistrust to new forms of cooperation have taken its place.
In December 1992, in Krakow, Poland, the countries of the Vishehrad Group signed the Central Europe Free Trade Agreement (CEFTA). This should gradually reduce customs duties an import charges between countries of the Group over a ten-year period. The creation of CEFTA received a warm reception from the EU, and Ukraine, Romania and Bulgaria expressed interest in joining. For members of the Vishehrad Group, economic cooperation through CEFTA creates real opportunities for international trade stimulation, with its flow of capital and labour.
Obstacles to Cooperation
Old antagonisms and new events have slowed progress of the Vishehrad Group; political and social disagreements threaten the cooperative nature of the pacts. For one thing, Central Europe's history keeps getting in the way. Relations between Poland and the former Czechoslovakia have been difficult: for example, in 1939 Polish troops occupied a small part of Slovakia named Zaolzie, after German troops entered Czechoslovakia. Poland also joined the Warsaw Pact troops which put down the "Prague Spring" uprisings in Czechoslovakia in 1968. The splitting of Czechoslovakia into two states in 1991 -- the "velvet divorce" creating the Czech Republic and Slovakia -- has weakened cooperation, as have of Polish-Ukrainian and Romanian-Hungarian relations. Approaches made to Ukraine and Romania to expand to six members were received coolly by those states.
History and its accoutrements are obstacles when they prevent people from cooperating. Whose version of history will be taught in the schools? German, Hungarian, Ukrainian, Polish, Czech, Slovak, Roma? Whose flags will fly over those schools or town halls? Whose national anthem will be sung? Already, historical claims over homes and land have caused disputes since 1990 among the countries and peoples of Central Europe. Somehow, a common history, or at least a common approach to the various histories of the peoples of this regionn, must be found.
Although the Group discussed integration along the lines of the Western European models, the four countries cannot agree on a common strategy toward the European Union. After Vaclav Klaus was elected prime minister in the Czech Republic, that country increasingly began to seek its own path into the EU.
Two fundamental obstacles to cooperation are now apparent. One is found in the political history and structures of the region, the other in the issue of national ethnic minority rights. Both are intertwined; the political history, especially the legal history since 1989, contains the seeds of minority problems and solutions.
Political Structures.
To understand the possibilities and problems of this political shift and its potential effect on cooperation among the countries of the Carpathian Euroregion, it is helpful to look briefly at the main principles of the emerging political systems of these countries and the political powers that play an important role in creating them. The constitutional provisions passed by the parliaments of the countries of the Carpathian Euroregion form a comprehensive legal framework for cooperation. They have a direct impact on the rights of citizens and the protection of those rights.
In Central and Eastern Europe, after centuries of contentious historical events, there is a commonality about history from 1946 to 1989. The shared history of the region was one of domination under socialism and struggles in Central Europe against that domination. As a result, following events of 1989, new legal frameworks are appearing that re-shape the political history and the rights and privileges of private citizens, including (and perhaps especially) those of minorities.
In Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Poland, the transition from communism to democracy started with the early rebellions of 1956, 1968 and 1980. The first two, in Hungry in 1956 and in Czechoslovakia in 1968, were crushed by Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact troops. But the transition in Poland which started in 1980 with the agreement between the rebellious Solidarity-led workers opposition and the communist leadership marked the beginning of the end. Although martial law introduced on 13 December 1981 temporarily broke and stopped the process of political change in Poland, the seeds of change had been firmly planted as they were earlier in Hungary and Czechoslovakia .
By 1989, with rapid political change occuring across the former Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact countries. Communist leaders in Hungary, Poland and Czechoslovakia agreed to relinquish power and to compromise with democratic political movements. Changes would be carried out through new constitutional and legal frameworks including new multiparty systems created by a peaceful transition based on re-written constitutions. Thus occurred an highly unusual political act across the region: the peaceful transition from totalitarian states into new democratic states.
Slovakia's history is somewhat different and important here because of the breakaway and formation of the new independent Slovak state on 1 January 1993 and its subsequent suspicions toward local autonomy and transboundary cooperation in the region. This state, unlike the others in the Carpathian Euroregion, now runs counter to the political tide surging through Central and Eastern Europe.
During its history the area of Slovakia was carved up by other states. In the Middle Ages, it was incorporated into the multinational Hungarian state, and during the 15th century the territory of the Slovaks and Czechs became part of a larger state ruled by the Polish Jagiellonian dynasty. In the following centuries, step by step, Slovakia was taken over by the Austrian Habsburgs, who created a multinational monarchy which lasted until 1918. At the end of the First World War, the formation of the Slovak National Council at Martin in October 1918 and the proclamation of the union of Slovakia with the Czech lands led to an independent Czechoslovakia state. Slovakia became part of the new independent Czechoslovak state, although very much the junior partner to the Czechs. In November 1938, the Vienna Agreement transferred some parts of Slovakia to Hungary, at this time ruled by pro-Nazis, and in March 1939 the remaining part of Slovakia became a "free state", nominally independent, but in fact dependent on Germany. On 29 August 1944 the anti-fascist Slovak National Uprising began and parts of Slovakia were liberated. The whole of Slovakia was free by spring 1945.
After the Second World War Czechoslovakia was re-established (but without the Carpathian Ruthenium) under a government composed of a socialist majority and headed by the pre-war President Edvard Benes. When the communists took full power in February 1948, the "socialism of industrialisation" of Slovakia became one of the aims of the communist government. Many new plants and enterprises were build in Slovakia and the difference in the level of development between the Czech Lands and Slovak diminished. In the beginning of 1968 some Czechoslovak communists, led by Alexander Dubcek, attempted to initiate a reform programme under the slogan "socialism with a human face". The invasion by the Soviet-led Warsaw Pact armies in August 1968 put an end to reforms of that period. The events of 1968, however, were not in vain: In 1969 the federal structure of a state was implemented. Czechoslovakia was constitutionally reorganised into a federation of the Czech and Slovak Republics. A two-tier legislature system was introduced, based on the Federal Assembly, as well as the Czech National Council and the Slovak National Council. The main decisions were made by the Communist Party Presidium, which in turn followed the policy of Moscow.
In November and December 1989 mass street protests increased in Czechoslovakia. Following the successful attempts of the people in other Eastern block countries to rid themselves of communist rule, Czechoslovak citizens forced the resignation of their communist leaders. This "velvet revolution" started on 17 November 1989 and led to free general elections on 8 and 9 June 1990. Three parliaments were elected for two years, half the normal term, with a mandate to pass a new constitution. In the Slovak Parliament (National Council) a majority was won by the Public Against Violence Party and the Christian Democratic Movement, which also dominated Slovak representation in the Federal Assembly.
Political and economic reforms were started in 1990, a main task of which was creating a market economy and a parliamentary democracy. Legislative amendments, made at the end of 1990, provided much greater executive powers for the Czechs and Slovaks republican governments from early 1991. In 1991 economic reforms were introduced, but the level of unemployment grew sharply in Slovakia and living conditions were worse for many of the Slovak people. During the summer of 1992, the leaders of two victorious parties, the Movement for Democratic Slovakia in the Slovak Republic and the Civic Democratic Party in the Czech Republic, agreed on a break-up of the Czechoslovak federation as of 1 January 1993. In preparation for a separate existence, the Slovak National Council (renamed the National Council of the Slovak Republic) in July adopted a declaration of Sovereignty, and on 1 September, it passed the Constitution of the Slovak Republic. The Czech National Council after a complex debate adopted the Constitution of the Czech Republic in December 1992. The Czechs and Slovaks began negotiating a peaceful break-up of a 74-year-old state and on 1 January 1993 the "velvet divorce" creating Slovakia and the new Czech Republic took place.
But while the Czech Republic appears to prosper, Slovakia sems to be stagnating. Vladimir Meciar, Slovakia's prime minister at the time of this writing, is moving his small splinter country away from European integration and admission to the EU. In 1995, he seized control of Slovakia's broadcasting, tried to throw the opposition party out of parliament and sought to bully the country's elected president, Michal Kovac, out of office. In 1996, the government passed laws making it a crime for Slovaks to speak ill of the country when abroad, and curtailing the freedom and activities of Slovakia's nongovernment organisations. These strictures raise serious doubts about the prime minister's (if not the country's) commitment to democracy and its willingness to create a climate that would attract foreign investment. Slovakia has had further difficulties with its economy. Unemployment in 1995 remained high and foreign trade had fallen. All of these events have raised questions about Slovakia inside CEFTA and the Vishehrad Group.
The history of Ukraine is valuable in evaluating Ukraine's unusual political and economic position. For more than seventy years Ukraine was one of the 15 republics of the Soviet empire. It also played an important role as one of the biggest republics of the European part of Soviet Union. Until 1989, the structure of power in Ukraine, as well as in other republics, was based on absolute power vested in the Central Committee of the Communist Party and in the Politburo of the Central Committee which was headed by a single leader, the First Secretary of the Politboro of the Communist Party. That First Secretary was usually Russian. There also existed other centres of power at the republic, regional, city and district levels: the Parliament (Soviet) of Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republics and at the regional and city levels the councils of People's Deputies.
Following 1989-91, the new Republic of Ukraine began taking more responsibility for most of the enterprises located in Ukraine; the Republic's ministries began implementing a more independent economic policy. After unsuccessful military coup in August 1991, the Communist Party was banned in Ukraine and the Central Committee, Politburo of the Party were removed from power. In December 1991 Leonid Kravchuk was elected of the President of Ukraine.
Caught in the middle between eager Central Europe and Russia, Ukraine seeks stronger ties to Western Europe and has undertaken talks with NATO, commenced cooperation with the European Council and the European Parliament. But it must also balance its new relations with the West with continuing, but re-defined, relations with Russia. One alternative for Ukrainian foreign policy is the Central European option.
What is gradually emerging is the predominantly European and regional nature of Ukraine's foreign policy interests, which will require developing relations with the countries of the European Union, Russia, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the Black Sea basin. One of the options presented by President Leonid Kuchma is that membership in regional associations or in a union of Central European countries should be considered as a transitional form for integration into the European Community for Ukraine. He also stated that Ukraine's geopolitical position is characterised by an inner contradiction between its political orientation towards the West and its overriding economic interests to the East. Ukraine has problems with its economy because of strong previous connections with other Soviet Republics, and needs to build not only a new market economy, but also to prepare its entire economy for an independent existence.
New Constitutions. Today, the five countries of the Carpathian Euroregion have similar political structures and their citizens share similar political, economic and social rights. For example, all of the Carpathian Euroregion countries have multi-party, universal, direct and free elections with secret ballots. Only Slovakia is edging away from this basic freedom. The countries also have similar parliamentary systems, although Poland is the only country among the Carpathian states with a parliament consisting of two chambers (a lower chamber called the Sejm and an upper chamber, the Senate). The five countries also have revised constitutions, although some of them, like those in Poland and Hungary, retain some of the language from the socialist period.
The Hungarian constitution, for example, creates a republic (Article 1 of the constitution) that is independent, democratic and constitutional state; among its main principles are minority guarantees against the tyranny of a majority, the right of judicial review, limited government power, the right of political parties to form and act to express the will of the people. (Article 3, Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the constitution). The constitution also defends the democratic and pluralist character of the state.
Poland still functions under the constitution passed in 1952 which has been amended several times. The political system which this constitution established after 1989 is completely different, however, from that of 1952. According to the new constitution, the Republic of Poland is a democratic, legal state, and sovereign power belongs to the nation. The nation holds power through its representatives elected to the Sejm and the Senate or directly by referendum. (Art. 1 and 2 of the Constitution). Political parties can freely act and associate with citizens.
The Constitution of the Slovak Republic, passed on 1 September 1992, is an excellent document and stands as a bulwark to the existing government. The constitution provides three main principles well known in democratic countries: the rights of citizens; the structures, powers and limitations of a legislative; and an executive branch of government. The first impression after reading the Slovak Constitution is that the Slovaks want to a emphasize general rights and liberties, such as human rights, political rights, rights of national minorities and ethnic groups; economic, social and cultural rights; the right to protect living space and cultural heritage; and the right to judicial and other legal protection. Almost one-fourth of the Slovak Constitution, about 43 articles, concerns human rights, liberties and citizen's rights. This is a natural consequence of the former communist regime where the people had rights and duties (but not liberties), but usually many of them were not implemented in real life. The constitution also forbids the use of capital punishment and prison labour. The right to possess property, the freedom to travel outside of Slovak territory, the right to chose a religion, the right to free information and to spread information, the right of freedom of association and the right to elect public officials are all guaranteed.
As the next section will detail, minority rights in Slovakia are important. The Slovak constitution also provides general protective rights for national minorities and ethnic groups (Art. 33 and 34). They may develop their culture, language, create national associations and cultural organisations. The use of their national language is guaranteed not only in personal contacts but also in state offices. The young Slovak state, in granting such rights and liberties to its citizens, has created a kind of guarantee for the unrestricted development of democracy in its political and state system.
The independent Ukrainian state passed a new constitution on 28 June 1996. According to this constitution, Ukraine is a sovereign, independent, democratic, social and legal state. Similar to the Slovak Constitution, a great part of the Ukrainian Constitution includes the rights, liberties and duties of citizens. These are typical for democratic countries. Ukrainian citizens can take part in election to legislative bodies including parliament (the Verhovna Rada) and self-government legislative bodies. The Ukrainian Parliament has one chamber and consists of 450 members. The legislative initiative belongs to members of Parliament, the President of Ukraine, the government and, in what is rather unusual to other systems, the National Bank. The position of the President of Ukraine is rather strong. The constitution's provisions allow him to keep control on all executive and other bodies including government, the National Bank, the State Committee of Radio and Television, the Ukrainian Army, the Constitutional Court. He has a right to nominate the chairs of these institutions or some of their members. The territorial administration of Ukraine has several levels: the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, regions, districts, towns, districts of towns, villages; the chairs of the territorial administrations are nominated by the President of Ukraine. A new political body in the Ukraine, created by the Constitution, is the Constitutional Court.
Rights and liberties of citizens. Questions concerning the rights and liberties of citizens are especially difficult in all of the former socialist countries, where citizens had legislated rights under the former regimes that were not implemented. All five countries guarantee basic human rights and freedoms. This is germaine to the people of the Carpathian Euroregion: questions are now arising over the rights of citizens to negotiate transboundary arrangements and policies, however well-intentioned. Are these citizens undertaking foreign policy, which is a right reserved to the state?
For example, the part of the Polish constitution that regulates citizen's rights and liberties actually comes from the old 1952 constitution and is a typical socialist document which guarantees rights for citizens, but avoids the more difficult issue of how to enforce those rights. The constitution declares that the citizens of Poland have equal rights without consideration of sex, date of birth, education, profession, nationality, race, religion and social situation. Each citizen also has the right to a job, although this is only a constitutional provision because the job market is weak and the Polish state is not be able to assure a job for all its citizens. The constitution also guarantees free medical care, but many hospitals and clinics demand different charges because of the high costs of medical service. Further rights include equal rights for women (a guarantee of the same salary as men, protection of motherhood), separation of church and state, and freedom of religion (Art. 82). Freedom of speech and association are also provisions.
The courts of the five countries also now defend and safeguard human rights and the institutional guarantee of the separation of powers. The primary tasks of the courts are to guarantee the abstract constitutional order (and correct the legal system) and to remedy individual injuries affecting fundamental human rights.
Ombudsman. One unusual characteristic of protection of rights in the region comes from Poland, where in addition to its court system, the country offers an Ombudsman, a new institution in the Polish constitutional system. The Ombudsman (*) was first elected in 1989 and in accordance with the Polish constitution protects the rights and liberties of citizens provided by the constitution and other laws. The Ombudsman serves for four years. Each citizen may present to the ombudsman any case of the breach or violation of rights or liberties by administrative, governmental or other bodies or institutions.
The declaration of rights and the protection of rights are important to the political stability and progress of Central and Eastern Europe. The enforcement of those declarations and protections, however, is another matter and something that these same states are new at undertaking. As mentioned, the need to be independent states exercising their own policies is now of central importance to these former socialist states. This is especially true given their wish to enter into economic union with western European states. Commitments to democracy and to democratic procedures will be watched as they work their way through the Vishehrad Group and the CEFTA arrangements.
National Minorities
Another major issue informing cooperation within Central and Eastern Europe concerns minority groups and their social, economic and political treatment. Some observers now believe that Central Europe's problems of national minorities most threatens the stability and development of the region. It may also influence decisions of acceptance into the EU; human rights remain an area of controversy.
„ Hungary-Slovakia.
Relations between the countries of Central Europe are in part shaped and driven by the presence of a Hungarian minority scattered throughout the region. This is especially true in the case of the Hungarian minority within Slovakia and the ethnic Hungarian population in Transylvania, part of Romania. Both are causing tensions between Hungary and its neighbours. In the case of Slovakia, this was exacerbated during and after the "velvet divorce" from the Czech Republic and by the growing disparity between the economies of Hungary and Slovakia. Hungary has the stronger economy and is expected to become a member of the EU, along with Poland and the Czech Republic. Slovakia is seldom mentioned in this context. Hungry is also less restrained toward multi-lateral economic cooperation with its neighbours and sees benefits in cooperation. Slovakia has chosen a more cautious and nationalistic path.
Because of the severity of minority relations in Central Europe, their effect on regional cooperation, and their impact on the social, political and economic future of the region, let's look at them in some depth.
There are about 560,000 Hungarians -- more than 10% of the population --living in Slovakia. They are theoretically protected by the Slovak Constitution, which in Articles 33 and 34 provides basic guarantees for national minorities or ethnic groups within that country. Minorities are guaranteed "universal development, [and] together with other members of minority groups [the right to] develop their own culture, [the] right to spread and get information in their native language, [to] create and join national associations, [to] establish and support [their own] education and cultural institutions". Minorities also have a right to education in their own language, to use their native language in the work place, and to participate in decisions concerning minorities.
The result is a theoretically wide enjoyment of rights for the Hungarian minority in Slovakia. Hungarians in Slovakia now have their own schools at different levels, many cultural, educational and other associations, and the same rights as the other citizens of Slovakia. They have their own representatives in the Slovak Parliament and in those communities with a majority of Hungarians the members of community councils may also be Hungarian. There are villages where the Slovak inhabitants are a minority and they must send their children to schools in other towns because of the lack of a nearby Slovak school.
On the surface there appears to be no problem. However, problems do exist. The roots of mutual prejudices run deep in the history of these two nations. Since 1993, its leaders seem to feel a kind of fear toward the Hungarian state despite the fact that Hungary does not have any territorial claims toward Slovakia. There is also a fear of the secession from Slovak territory of areas inhabited by the Hungarian minority, and of a lack of loyalty toward the Slovak state, rumors spread mainly by Slovak nationalists and their movement, Slovenska Matica (Slovak Motherhood). They cite the fact that in Hungarian schools every week, the children sing the Hungarian national anthem and during state holidays they put up Hungarian banners or flags, not Slovakian.
The opening words of the preamble of the Slovak Constitution are: "We, the Slovak nation,..." During the passing of this Constitution, representatives of the Hungarian minority in the Slovak National Council walked out in protest against these words which they interpreted as de facto recognising the Slovak state as a one-nation state. If one word were changed -- from "nation" to "citizens" -- a single and major cause of tension would be lessened; thus, "We, the Slovak citizens" would recognize the diversity of peoples in Slovakia. Also, Article 6 provides that the official languages of the Slovak Republic is Slovak, thus ignoring the presence of national minorities, among them Hungarians, and creating a strong feeling of nationalism.
By contrast, in Hungary national minorities enjoy guaranteed rights in that state's constitution. Paragraph 68 stipulates that national and ethnic minorities living in the Republic of Hungary also share political power. In Paragraph 70/A of the Hungarian Constitution, Hungary guarantees to every person residing on its territory human rights and rights connected to citizenship without any distinction as to race, colour of skin, sex, language, religion, political opinion, national or social background, birth or property status. Also, in Hungary there is no "state language" officially defined by law. The right to freely use one's mother language is guaranteed; in other words everybody has the right to speak his/her mother language everywhere, even in official documents. Representatives of minorities may speak their native language in the Parliament and in the bodies of local government. National minorities have the right to educate their children in their mother language in schools supported by the state. They may practice their chosen religion, form cultural associations and openly cherish and practice their culture. The law guarantees them the right to publish newspapers in their mother languages; Hungarian television and radio broadcast special programmes for seven minorities (Gypsy, Croatian, German, Romanian, Serb, Slovak, Slovenian).
The Hungarian Constitution also provides for national and ethnic minorities to participate in public affairs and to be represented at the local and national levels. A registered minority candidate is considered elected if he/she receives votes equal to two-thirds of the valid votes cast for the non-minority representative. There are more than 200 minority representatives presently working in local self-government; minorities are also represented in the Hungarian Parliament. At the local level, self-government laws give national and ethnic minorities a voice through the institution of a local spokesman for the minorities. There is also the legal right of appeal through the court system. Backing all this up is a national ombudsman (a commissioner of citizens' rights), who may investigate abuses and prosecute. All of these rights are contained in the Act of 1993, the Rights of National and Ethnic Minorities (Act LXXXVII, 1993) which provides protection for national minorities on a wide scale.
The Hungarian authorities, with their open ambition to establish the rights of minorities to meet western European standards, have incorporated those rights into law. The Office for National and Ethnic Minorities was established in September 1991 and is a trustee for the Foundation for National and Ethnic Minorities of Hungary, endowed by the government. Minorities have established their own consultative, the Roundtable of Hungary's National and Ethnic Minorities, which seeks a permanent dialogue with the state government. This attitude in Hungary creates the basis for building a common trust and eliminating misunderstanding and prejudice between Slovaks and Hungarians.
It is a fact that during the communist period in Hungary a policy of forced assimilation took place despite official declarations for minority rights. Traditional communities of minorities were crushed by forced resettlement, the removal or exchange of peoples, the confiscation of property and the forced collectivisation of agriculture. Thus, it has become important during the post-community period to protect minorities and their rights. This includes the deliberate preservation of minority peoples' identities and cultures, and special treatment (positive discrimination) to achieve equality of opportunity.
The prospects for future relations between Hungrians and Slovakians remains unclear. Both sides proclaim their wish to find satisfactory solutions to their differences, and indeed there are positive factors shaping Hungarian-Slovakian relations. These include the willingness to overcome a contentious history and to focus on contemporary and future developments. These include a commonly voiced wish to become members of the EU. Slovakia, for one, cannot go this route alone.
„ Ukraine.
In the Trans-Carpathia area of Ukraine, which is shared by Slovakia, Hungary, Romania and Poland, live at least 75 national minorities. Most of them are Slovaks, Hungarians, Romanians, Germans, Ruthenians, Gypsies, Poles and Russians. Here, too, there are no great overt conflicts or problems with minorities or their rights. Minorities enjoy protection to create cultural associations, attend schools with instruction in their native language, publish books and newspapers in their languages, and participate in political and social affairs. They have representatives in the Ukrainian Parliament and their representatives are the members of local governments. In areas where a minority people comprise a majority of the inhabitants, they form local governments and the documents of their activity there are prepared in two languages, the minority language and Ukrainian.
In Trans-Carpathia there are national schools for people in five languages: Ukrainian, Hungarian, Romanian, Slovak and Russian. Other minorities can learn their native language in school as well, especially,if there are not enough children to form separate schools. Minority candidate for university admissions may take entrance exams in their native languages. While there is no serious conflict in the region between different nationalities or minorities, there are some minor difficulties concerning religion, particularly between Greek Catholics and Orthodox worshipers. During the Communist regime the Greek Catholic religion was practically forbidden, but it survived among people who have started to demand the return of their churches, which were used and occupied for many years by the Orthodox. This situation has resulted in problems between believers in those two religions. The authorities, afraid to make any official intervention, only support the building of new churches. As a result, about 70 churches are now being built in Trans-Carpathia.
Poland and Ukraine have a history of hostilities; it is not lost on Ukrainians that Polish nationalists still remain nostalgic over land and settlements that were once Polish but are now within Ukraine. In 1990, the two countries signed a declaration of principles for the enhancement of Polish-Ukrainian relations and agreed that no territorial claims would be raised against each other in the future. In 1993 a bilateral agreement was signed establishing Polish-Ukrainian cooperation on disarmament.
„ Poland.
Poland is a more homogeneous country then the other Central European countries. Minorities comprise only 2.6% of the population of Poland and Polish is the only official language of the country. For many years it was very bad to declare oneself as non-Polish or to be identified with another nationality. In the late 1940s, Polish authorities declared that only Polish peoples lived within the borders of the post-World War II state; areas with a large population of minorities became parts of neighbouring countries or the representatives of minorities were deported, such as the Germans. The Polish authorities supported assimilation of minorities. After the changes of 1989, minorities living in Poland had the opportunity to declare their national origin, to create their own cultural and educational associations and to develop their traditions and customs.
Nonetheless, Poland does have pockets of minorities. These include: Ukrainians, estimated as 350,000, German-speakers (in Silesia) numbering 350,000; Belorussians, 200,000; Czechs and Slovaks 30,000; Lithuanians 25,000; Gypsies 24,000; and Jews 15 000. Approximately 95% of Poles are Roman Catholic. The next largest religion communities are the Eastern Orthodox and Protestant. It is difficult to estimate the number of members of those religions, because there is no official data regarding it.
In October 1992, Poland ratified the European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and became a member of the European Human Rights Convention. Each person, including minorities, whose human rights are violated may appeal to the European Commission for Human Rights. The Polish Constitution provides equal rights "for the citizens of the Republic of Poland" (not "for Poles") without difference of sex, education, profession, nationality, race, religion, origin and social status (Article 67, para 2). Also, the citizens of the Republic of Poland, without differences of nationality, race or religion, have equal rights in all branches of state, political, economic, social and cultural life. Any violation of this principle by any direct or non-direct means or limits in rights, because of nationality or race, is punished. (Article 81)
Looking at the constitutional and legal provisions in the countries of the Carpathian Euroregion, it appears that minorities have full opportunities to develop their culture and language. In Slovakia and in Hungary, however, so many stereotypes and prejudices toward minorities exist, with roots deeply sunk in the past, that even best legal provisions are not able to overcome them. The situation of minorities in Poland and in Ukraine should not be a source of obstacles to the development of cooperation.
Chapter Three: The Structures of Self-government
What is the nature and importance of local self-government? Joanna Regulska argues that "This background is all more important because the understanding of the state has come into direct conflict with the realities of rapid political and economic changes in the region. These changes have created barriers that obstruct the effective development and implementation of reform at the local level." It is difficult to establish the structures of self-government that will enable citizens to govern themselves. This is especially true in the countries which were for a long time centralised, where decisions concerning local governance came from the top down. For bottom-up management -- given the efforts at creating new forms of governance -- it is necessary to identify and establish political institutions at the local level which will not be controlled by the central government, but will be designed and based on local politics and needs. As Zofia Kordela-Borczyk describes in her Occasional Paper, there is at issue here a tension between the political and economic center (or core) and the border regions (or periphery) of these emerging democracies in Central and Eastern Europe.
All the Carpathian Euroregion countries are now examining the structures of self-government and local civil society. This process continues and one must bear in mind that all of these young democracies are learning and practicing democracy at the local as well as at the national level. The following are the self-government structures in the countries of the Carpathian Euroregion.
„ Hungary
The Hungarian self-government law is formulated within the basic requirements of the European Charter of Self-Government. The preamble to the Hungarian law provides: "Local government enables communities of citizens to manage public affairs related to their localities directly, that is, through their elected local authority, independently, and in a democratic manner."
There are several levels of self-government structures: at the level of the village, the town, the capital city and its districts and the county. These entities may function autonomously in public affairs and they are responsible for their work. Rights are vested in the local people through their elected representatives and their participation in local plebiscites. These representatives include the mayor, elected committees and the municipal corporation. All rights are equal for each local government.
Local governments may independently regulate and freely administer their affairs. The local government also may, through its elected representative body or through the decision of a local plebiscite, undertake action on any local problem which is not regulated by or contrary to some legal provisions. Local government may take action on issues and problems in accordance to the law concerning tasks and duties exercised by local government. Local governments may also autonomously form their own organisational and operational order, create local emblems and flags, distinctions and honorary titles; independently manage local government property, deal on entrepreneurial activities on its own responsibility. This autonomy is so strong that the local decisions may only be superseded by the courts or by the Constitutional Court, but then only if they violate any provision of law.
There are two other powers that local governments enjoy in Hungary. These are directly relevant to the Euroregion concept. One very important right is the possibility to freely form associations with other local governments which share mutual interests. These governments may also cooperate with local governments across their borders and may even join the international organisations of those local governments. In other words, Hungarian local authorities are free to enter into agreements across their internatioal boundaries.
The second is found in Article 8 of the Self-government Act which provides the main tasks performed by municipal governments. These include such things as protection of the natural environment, building waste water treatment and purification stations, maintaining local roads and communal areas; providing local mass transport, and the like. Municipal governments also protect the rights of national and ethnic minorities (Art. 8. para 4). The municipal government may support voluntary organised communities of the population and co-operate with these communities to performance these tasks. These representatives of local government also oversee other significant functions: the signing of an agreement of cooperation with foreign local government, the right to join to international organisations of local governments.
Article 41 provides that the bodies of representatives of the local self-government have a right to freely form associations to perform their tasks more effectively and efficiently. The conditions of such association may not violate the rights of any participant. Local government bodies may possess their own property and may independently manage their budget and incomes. The local government budget is distinct from the state budget but receives monies through it by subsidies and other budgetary links. The sources of incomes of the Hungarian local self-governments are from central taxes rechannelled for their use from revenue transferred from present central budgetary contributions and subsidies and from their own resources. These may include local rates, profits, dividends and rents, incomes from the sale of hunting licences and proportion of part deriving from the sale by the State Property Agency of non-public-utility companies.
There are several bodies which have powers over the local governments. First is Parliament, which regulates the legal status, exclusive duties and powers, tasks, type of organs, funds, and fundamental rules of self-governments activity as well as the legal status of local representatives and rules concerning their election, rights and obligations. Only the Parliament may dissolve a local body of representatives, usually on the grounds that its activity has been in contrary to the constitution and only after an opinion by the Constitutional Court. The President of the Republic sets the dates for the election of local governments, decides on granting the title of a town or city, on the formation of a village, the dissolution of a union of villages, and the naming of towns and villages on the initiative of the local governments.
The Hungarian Self-government Act provides a legal framework for the establishment and activity of local governments. Its self-government powers are very wide and their scope assures the performance of self-government rights and tasks. Control institutions are also established, which oversee the legality of decisions of self-government bodies. This creates very good conditions for the development of local communities and societies which in turn enhances the opportunities and functions of transboundary cooperation.
„ Poland
Poland began a legislative debate on local government reform in the summer of 1989 and during a brief period the Poles achieved unprecedented progress. Yet there are also many conflicts and disputes over the desired level of local self-governance. The Polish Constitution guarantees the participation of territorial self-government and establishes the conditions for other forms of self-government (Art. 5 of the Constitution). The Local Self-government Act of 8 March 1990, amended several times, establishes the basis for the functioning of civil society at the local level.
There are only two levels of the administrative structures in Poland. The lowest level represents self-government and administrative bodies in communities (gmina) and regions (wojew—dztwo), but at a level of wojew—dztwo there exists only the territorial state administration which is a representation of the central government at regional level.
A very interesting body comprises all communities from the area of region (wojew—dztvo). It is called a self-government parliament (sejmik), which is a common representation of communities. The main tasks exercised by the sejmik include the assessment of the activities of the communities and communal institutions, mediations in disputes between communities (Art. 76).
The Polish Self-government Act (Ustawa o samorzgdzie, Art. 7) sets forth the tasks for local communities which include zone planning and environmental protection; building roads, bridges, squares; supplying services like water, sewage treatment, dumps and utilisation of waste, electricity and hot water, local transport, health protection, social aid and care centres, municipality building, schools, trade markets, parks and green squares, public security and fire protection and so forth.
In Poland the structures of self-government power usually are very active in the villages. The inhabitants of a community control and decide their affairs by an election or referendum or by the political elective bodies of community. A motion to hold a referendum can be proposed by the community council or one tenth of inhabitants and its result is obligatory if at least 30% people take part in the referendum.
Polish communities enact community ordinances and laws within their borders, create associations, and own community property. This right also belongs to villages, districts, and settlements which can decide about the incomes resulting from the use of their property.
Like their Hungarian counterparts, the local Polish governments have the right to create their own budgets and to undertake independent financial acitivities and expenditures. This point especially was almost unknown during the communist period when communities received money from the National Government which decided how it should be used. Incomes result from taxes and charges, proceeds from community property and state subsidies. Most important, the Polish Self-government Act provides for local comunities to create associations and alliances for local purposes. The associations are a legal entity and they are responsible for their activity.
Since 1990, Polish communities have done well with their newly-independent self-government in spite of mistakes and problems. The results of changes are visible in almost every community. The creation of independent bodies at the local level are allowing them the freedom and support to expand and develop local civil society. Sometimes the community councils focus too much on internal disputes and had problems in achieving an agreement between members from different political parties. Sometimes their activity was visible mainly when they decided to change the names of streets and squares in their community, and as a result spent a lot of money on it. Sometimes the people in a young self-government structure were also the people who wanted to make their own commercial businesses. But generally, it seems, local governments are finding that self-government holds promises for cooperation that can be most effective and successful.
„ Slovakia
The Slovakian state enacted its self-government act (Zakon o obecnom zriadeni, 6 septembra 1990) while it was still part of Czechoslovakia; it was carried into the new state and it has been amended several times. The law, like its counterparts in the countries of the Euroregion, provides the guiding principles for local civil society.
As defined by Article 1, a community is a basic self-government territorial structure and consists of the citizens living there permanently. The community is a legal entity (or has legal status) which can govern independently and conduct its own financial policy within the limits of law. New duties can be provided to communities only by parliamentary law. Also in accordance with the Euroregion countries, local communities are independent and may create common associations with other communities, may join or form a new community as well as divide and create two separate communities. But they must bear all of the consequences of such actions especially concerning property and the governing bodies of the two new communities.
The tasks which are exercised by self-government structures are typical for democratic states. The communities are independent, citizens hold referendums and public meetings through which they exercise local political and economic power. This right is well known by the inhabitants of communities Europe or the United States. In Slovakia, however, this provision is used very seldom because it is known only in very small communities.
The Slovak self-government law provides for citizens rights in local communities. The citizens are people who are registered there for permanent residence. (This type of registration is unknown in western countries. Citizens in the socialist states were obligated -- and some still are in many states -- to register their place of inhabitance. This provision was enacted in the Soviet Union where the authorities had to know almost everything about citizens and to control them.) Citizens of a Slovakian community have the right to elect and to be elected to the bodies of the community, as well as to take part in referendums. A citizen has also the right to use property and facilities of the community and to demand the protection of their property in the area of community, as well as protection of each person and family (para 3). Each citizen has also duties as a member of the community to help the bodies of the community protect community property, environment and to provide aid in the case of any catastrophes.
The communities create and spend their own budget, regulate and decide about town taxes and charges, discuss and act on agreements concerning the exploitation of local resources, and also decide about the possibility of assisting businesses such as caring for local transport facilities, public green areas, public lighting, supplying water, sewage systems, keeping tidy the area of the community, public graveyards, trade markets, cultural and sport facilities, local historical monuments, sights and buildings.
Relations between the communities and the state are similar to the other Carpathian Euroregion countries. Local communities manage their own finances, but the state is obligated to provide the financial resources and the control of the execution of these tasks is divided between community and the state. The law demands the cooperation between community and state and assistance made by state if it is necessary.
The local community has the right to finance its needs with its own money from such resources as receipts from property, charges supplied by a community enterprises and legal entities, town taxes and charges, fines, funds given by legal and personal entities, receipts coming in obligations and rented money. They can also receive money from the state for financing special programs and tasks and as a subsidies for performing self-government tasks.
The community also enacts its own ordinances which can not be in violtion of the constitution or any other laws. If any community law is in violation, only the Slovak National Council has a right to abolish it.
Political power comes from the community council and the mayor of the community (starosta). The community council is a representative body, and consists of councillors elected in direct, secret ballot on the base of proportional representation. The debates of community council are open and the citizens have to be informed about the meetings of the council at least three days in advance. The mayor is a representative of the community and heads its executive body. He is elected by the citizens by direct ballot. The community council by a majority of three-fifths of all of members of the community council can decide to proclaim the election of a new mayor.
The structure and tasks of self-government bodies in Slovakia are typical of democratic countries. It must be noted that there is no strict separation power, as for instance in Poland when is impossible to join the function of the head of the executive body with the post of chairman of the legislative body, but the principle division of power is kept. The self-government bodies are relatively independent and they can realise their duties. But there are a lot of problems in the practice of performing their tasks because of the lack of money and not quite clear legal regulations concerning the division of power between state and local self-government. For instance accordingly to par. 4, (2) (g) of the Self-government Act, the communities should "...create and preserve the health conditions of their citizens..." but the money for medical care is still distributed by the state.
„ Ukraine
There has been some recent of intensification of executive power at the local level. Until the time of the presidential elections in 1991, local power was concentrated in city and regional councils, whose deputies were elected. In the past, representatives of the Ukrainian president were appointed, who took over the functions of the chairman of local executive committees.
Local bodies of the executive branch included regional and district councils. They enforce and implement presidential decrees and other acts of the Legislative and Executive branches, they also control and co-ordinate the activity of enterprises, institutions and organisations, bodies of local and regional self-government.
Self-government bodies in Ukraine exist at several different levels. The primary self-government bodies are councils in villages, worker's settlements (a settlement between village and town), towns, districts and regions. The system of self-governance includes city, town and village councils, city referenda and other forms of territorial administration. The councils consist of councillors who are elected to five years terms on basis of a general and universal vote by secret ballot; the right to nominate the candidates is given to all. Local councils prepare, approve and implement budgets for their respective populated areas; prescribe city taxes and levies according to the law; govern and maintain community property and decide the questions that arise out of collective needs of their respective territories.
The form of self-government is determined directly by the population in regions and districts through regional referenda and regional and district councils. Regional and district councils have legislative, executive and coordinating functions, as well as other forms of authority, in spheres and within the areas stipulated by the constitution. However, local and regional self-government authority may be suspended by the Parliament at the request of the President if these bodies violate the Constitution and laws of Ukraine.
At the regional, city and district levels it is possible to observe the struggle for power between councils (elected structures) and representatives of the president. Conflict exists in almost all cities and regions of Ukraine, especially in Kiev. The councils have gradually re-established their authority over the representatives of the president. Thus, in Kiev, local councils have taken exclusive control over matters of privatisation.
Chapter Four: The Possibilities for Cooperation
The local level may be the best place for creating contacts and for decreasing tensions between people of different nations and nationalities. For many years cooperation has been developed and exercised between western countries at the local level. Examples of cooperation between communities in the western states confirm that this type of activity is very effective and may bring a variety of social, political and economic gains for all participants. The transformation of the political systems of the Carpathian Euroregion countries create the possibilities of opening their borders and encouraging cooperation between governments at the local level.
During the Communist period slogans about "friendship and cooperation" were commonplace, but "cooperation" at local levels was usually limited to political leaders from the Communist Parties visiting each other and the propaganda associated with it. There did not exist any transboundary contacts which would have benefitted local people from the neighbouring countries, except perhaps irregular visits of different art groups and music ensembles or troupes. Cooperation was very difficult to develop because of the closed borders. It was almost impossible to develop economic associations because they were organised and controlled at the highest state level.
The changes and transformation among the countries of the Carpathian Euroregion are new challenges for them. They continue to search for new ways of common contacts and connections among them. The best type of cooperation between people, which this paper proposes, is at the local level . Legal regulations provided in the new or newly-amended constitutions or in the self-government acts have created autonomous, independent local regimes that have independence and rights to decide and control their own economic and political affairs. Nonetheless, there remain tensions between the central governments and the Euroregions over these freedoms. Central governments want to limit rights granted to local governments, or to control them. This tendency increased in 1995 and 1996 with the election of communist governments in the region and the crackdown on freedoms in Slovakia. The people now in government may again seek to centralise power and thus reverse the gains made since 1989.
In this context, let's now look at the legal possibilities for cooperation in the Carpathian Euroregion states.
„ The Hungarian Self-government Act in Article 1 (paragraph 6, point c) enumerates the rights of governments at different levels. On the local level, it provides that government "may freely form associations with other local governments for having its interests represented and protected, may adhere to national interest organisations; in the performance of its tasks and within its powers may cooperate with local governments abroad, and may enter international organisations of local governments." (Italics added.)
Thus, in Hungary at least, local governments are free under national law to reach across the international boundaries to "form associations with other local governments" and to cooperate with them in matters of mutual benefit to the local governments and their peoples. Article 10 (point f) states that the Hungarian body of representatives must agree on cooperation by a local Hungarian government with a foreign local government. It allows local governments to become members of international or regional local governmental associations and opens a wide opportunity for cooperation with local governmental bodies from other countries.
„ The Polish Self-government Act does not provide so precise a rule for association by local Polish governments with their foreign counterparts. Article 84 allows local communities to form associations for supporting the idea of self-government and to preserve common interests. But it remains unclear whether or not local governments may join international associations. The fact is that the law does not forbid it; nor does it encourage it.
„ Ukraine follows a similar pattern. In the Ukraine, the rights, duties and obligations controlling local governments are themselves controlled at the national level through the executive branch. Local city councils do have a wide range of powers, but these do not include the right to form associations or cooperative alliances with local government counterparts across international boundaries. This struggle for power between the councils and the representatives of the president exists across the Ukraine and is continuing.
„ In Slovakia the situation is similar to that in Poland. The self-government regulation (paragraph 1, point c) provides that the local "community has a right to associate with other communities with [the] purpose [of] social welfare". Paragraph 21 states that "the right to enter into permanent or temporary republic, regional and other associations with other communities for the purpose of fulfilling their common interests". But the Slovak Self-government Act does not provide in any direct way for local communities to associate across borders with other communities from other countries; nor does it forbid it, however.
Thus, in three of the four Carpathian Euroregion countries -- with the exception of Ukraine -- there are either laws strongly supportive of transboundary cooperation (Hungary) or laws that establish certain rights for local communities that do not expressly forbid such cooperation (Poland and Slovakia).
The situation in Slovakia, however, remains delicate. At the meeting of the council of the Carpathian Euroregion on 27-29 January 1995, the Slovakian members requested and obtained full membership in the Carpathian Euroregion. Only nine days later,, on 7 February 1995 the new Slovakian government of Vladimir Meciar cancelled Slovakia participation in the Carpathian Euroregion. The decision was made against the wishes of the local governments in eastern Slovakia which had particiated in transboundary cooperation since the Euroregion was formed. The position of the Meciar government was precisely opposite the wishes of the local Slovakians in the Carpathian area. Its statement makes two main arguments to support its decision:
(1) Present Slovakia legislation, the government argued, does not provide local governments with the possibility to participate in transboundary cooperation. Slovakia, it continued, has not finished the process of "regionalization" (the creation of regional, territorial and administrative units within Slovakia) and has not adopted the European Outline Convention on Transfrontier Cooperation No. 106 of the Council of Europe. In brief, Slovakia was not ready to participate in transboundary cooperation in the Carpathian Euroregion.
(2) Representatives of the Slovakia part of the Carpathian Euroregion, the government stated, had not informed the Slovak national government and its ministries about their work in the Carpathian Euroregion, nor had they officially requested an approval for their membership in the Carpathian Euroregion.
With regard to the Slovakian government's statement, there are five responses. First, the Slovakian part of the Carpathian Euroregion is represented by local governments in eastern Slovakia in the Association of the Carpathian Region which is a registered legal entity. Second, in the Slovakian Self-government Act discussed above, communities have the right to enter into regional associations. While the law does not define "region" -- whether it means an area within Slovakia or one that is transboundary -- the interpretation of this issue should be made by the Slovakian Constitutional Court and not by the government. Third, a large number of towns and villages in Slovakia participate in sister-city relations with foreign municipalities; some of them are members of the Council of Europe's entities on European self-government. Fourth, the Slovak government does support transboundary cooperation between the cities and regions of Bratislava, Vienna and Gyšr (Hungary). Fifth, local Slovak participants in the Carpathian Euroregion have been regularly providing the central Slovakian government in Bratislava with information about the activities of the Carpathian Euroregion. Representatives of the Slovakian Ministry of Foreign Affairs participated in the preparation of the statutes and other founding documents of the Carpathian Euroregion, and a representative of Slovakian government attended the official ceremony of the foundation of the Carpathian Euroregion in February 1993.
Clearly, for Slovakia (as well as for Romania) the issues lie deeper. Lingering within this attack by the Meciar government was a more insidious implication. Adversaries of the Carpathian Euroregion let it be known that they considered the Carpathian association "a secret Hungarian plot" aimed at the disintegration of Slovakia and the creation of "a greater Hungary". Although this did not appear in the official government statement, the fear of the Hungarian state is widely held within populist and nationalist groups in Slovakia, who worry over the presence of a large Hungarian minority (more than 350,000 people) in Slovakia that may somehow lead to the restoration of Greater Hungary.
Romania shares similar concerns. It has made clear its own fears of Hungarian domination and has limited to observer status its representatives to the Carpathian Euroregion. Romania is especially concerned about its citizens in the communities of Transylvania (the area of Satu Mare and Baia Mare in northwest Romania) where a large Hungarian minority (about 1.6 million people) are viewed suspiciously as a potential power that might link this area with Hungary in the future. Relations between Hungary and Romania concerning the Hungarian minorities are tense and will be difficult to change because they are connected to the status of the Hungarian minority in all of Romania.
For example, only the members of the Hungarian minority, among several other minorities living in Romania, were forced to sign a declaration of loyalty to the Romanian state. Such demands only toward Hungarians and other minorities violate the principle of equality among the people in Romania, and become a further reason for the tensions between Romania and Hungary. Under law, the Hungarian minority has a right to establish cultural associations, to use their native language, and to have their own schools. But there are not enough Hungarian schools and in Cluj, the Hungarian Bolyai University was merged with the Romanian Babes University in 1959. The Hungarian minority does not have its own university there now. Efforts to re-establish a Hungarian University have met strong resistance from the Romanian government.
These tensions make it difficult for transboundary cooperation among these states to take root. Yet there should be no concerns about the Carpathian Euroregion and its efforts at transboundary cooperation. The Carpathian Euroregion represented the first European organisation consisting solely of East European, post-communist countries. According to the text of an agreement of the Carpathian European Association, signed by the Hungarian, Polish, Slovak and Ukrainian parties, "the Association shall not represent a new, supra-national or supra-state entity, but rather a framework for facilitating interregional co-operation among its members". This means that the creation of the Euroregion will not lead to any change in the borders, and establishes an inter-regional association for promoting transboundary cooperation among its members.
The Polish and Ukrainian governments are unequivocal about their support for transboundary cooperation. The Polish government has supported the idea of regional cooperation, not only in the Carpathian Euroregion. Perhaps because Poland is eagerly seeking to become a member of an integrated Europe, it is encouraging transboundary cooperation with all of the neighbouring countries and is one of the postcommunist states which signed agreements with all its neighbours to form "a good neighbourhood". Polish communities along different parts of the country's border now belong to five Euroregions and two more are projected. Poland was also the first Central European state which recognised the independent Ukrainian state. Its support for regional cooperation is further clear from the creation of the Vishehrad Group in 1990 with the Czech, Slovak and Hungarian states. Ratification by Poland of the European Charter of Self-government in 1993 (adopted by the Council of Europe) was also a gesture of support for cooperation between self-government structures at local level.
Ukraine has also demonstrated interest in developing cooperation within the Carpathian Euroregion and this interest is supported by its government officials. For Ukrainians, such cooperation marks a chance for development and to achieve real benefits for this country. The enthusiasm of local authorities from Uzgorod in Transcarpathia helped to open this area for useful transboundary economic and trade cooperation.
Poland, Hungary and Ukraine have already adopted the European Convention on Transfrontier Co-operation No. 106, which was also adopted by the Council of Europe. The Slovak government, however, has been postponing its adoption of this convention for more than two years, while at the same time officially declaring its commitment to European integration and the creation of a compatible legal system. This argument creates the question whether or not Slovakia is ready for European integration and if its government has sufficient good will to move in that direction.
Chapter Five: Conclusions and Recommendations
With dreams of quick membership in the EU and NATO postponed, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe have sought to rebuild relations with their neighbours and former partners based on the principles of mutual benefit. This has not been easy, given the unevenness of political and economic reforms among them, and the obstacles to economic cooperation and to addressing minority rights. Nonetheless, all of the countries of the Carpathian Euroregion have developed a common strategy: to look for closer partners for transboundary cooperation among their neighbours. They are approaching this at various speeds and in a variety of ways.
The institutional structure of the Carpathian Euroregion is itself important to building confidence in transbounary cooperation among the countries of the area. Establishing associations and organizations that meet regularly creates conditions for permanent contact and for developing initiatives and proposals. This is one reason that cooperation within the Carpathian Euroregion is more effective and easier than only between individual communities.
The Carpathian Euroregion may be a good regional model of transboundary cooperation. Opening borders, encouraging transboundary communication and freedoms, forming small and local international associations is apparently beneficial to the people of this region. One can argue that the Carpathian Euroregion Association offers at least five major areas that encourage cooperative behaviour:
(1) The opportunity to develop political, social and economic resources of mutual benefit in the wider context of transboundary communities;
(2) The confidence-building nature of such development and of transboundary openness and cooperation;
(3) The control and protection of transboundary natural resources and the environment, largely as a result of mutual interests in developing eco-tourism;
(4) The common work within the Council or the Working Commissions of the Euroregions with the opportunity for people at the local and regional levels to meet and work together;
(5) The creation of initial transboundary institutions and associations of local governance that may be precursors to affiliation with the European Community.
The structure and institutions of the Carpathian Euroregion, like those of the other Euroregions, also provide potential venues for implementing the national laws of governance and human rights -- especially the protection of minorities -- of the member states. This, combined with the emphasis on local civil society and normative measures, make the Euroregion a very attractive model for cross-border cooperation. In fact, although planned as a transboundary instrument of cooperation, the Carpathian Euroregion has grown to become a far larger regional entity. Approaches begun by local people with the Carpathian Euroregion Association very often open up and facilitate contacts between regional, transfrontier institutions, entrepreneurs, agencies and others working in particular fields. Thus its ability to serve as a conduit for wider transboundary cooperation is increasing.
This is because the common interests espoused by the Carpathian Euroregion are larger than its borders. Work within the Council or the Working Commissions bring together local and regional people, which opens up and facilitates contacts between a wider number of institutions, entrepreneurs, companies, educators, and people working in areas of governance. The Carpathian Euroregion Association provides a legal base and creates the opportunity for greater associations. This is confirmed by the fact that parts of Poland (district of Rzeszow), Slovakia (districts of Kosice and Presov), Hungary (district of Szolnok Magyar), and Ukraine (districts of Lviv, Ivano-Frankovsk and Chernovsty) all joined the Carpathian Association after its founding in 1993. Although envisioned as a local area of cross-border cooperation, therefore, the Carpathian Euroregion is becoming an institution of broad regional influence and interregional cooperation.
Today, the Carpathian Euroregion promotes enterprises that include the fields of trade, culture, tourism, journalism and youth exchanges. Towns in the region are promoting transboundary Euroregion fairs and cultural festivals with participation by the people all over the Carpathian Euroregion. Universities of the region are also cooperating with universities and research centres outside the Euroregion on common projects and the exchange of information about history, archeology, ethnography, and even the delicate issues surrounding current problems with ethnic groups within the area.
Support is also coming into the region from some western institutions. The Eurasia Foundation is funding a common project with the University of Georgia (USA) and the University of Uzgorod to create a Centre for Reforms of Public Administration. The Institute for EastWest Studies, with the support of the Sasakawa Peace Foundation in Japan, established in 1991 to help local people prevent conflict in ethnically and religiously mixed regions of Central Europe. By bringing models of conflict prevention and resolution to the region, the Institute for EastWest Studies sought to diminish inter-ethnic, religious and historical tensions in the region, develop cross-border cooperation, contribute to the creation of open societies, and to assist with bottom-up advancement of economic and political cooperation. Workshops are being funded to explore problems of history, geography, tourism, self-government and local development of enterprise initiatives. Tourism is of special importance to the region where unemployment remains high and a major problem.
Despite early successes, problems concerning transboundary cooperation remain. Some of these can be easily addressed by the people of the Carpathian Euroregion themselves. The following comments and recommendations in the area of transboundary cooperation focus on tourism, journalism, financial institutions and open borders.
„ Tourism. In June 1993 during one of the first meetings of representatives of the member countries of the Euroregion, the issue of cooperation with respect to tourism was discussed. One conclusion of this meeting was to coordinate financial assistance for regional tourism from international institutions and the Office of Phyical Culture and Tourism agreed to apply to PHARE and other selected foundations for financial help. But little has been done since.
Recommendations:
(1) The full implications of tourism -- an important part of the regional development plan for the Carpathian Euroregion -- must continue to be discussed openly and trans-regionally in public meetings at the local level. A single, coherent, acceptable regional plan should be created by local people and then agreed upon in the Euroregion.
(2) Applications for financial assistance to develop regional tourism should also be coordinated. It would be useful to prepare a common plan of attracting tourism to the area. This could be undertaken by the Carpathian Euroregion Association and would include identifying tourist attractions within the four countries and suggesting ways of linking them by public transportation.
(3) A third recommendation in the area of tourism concerns creating an International Biosphere Reserve along the borders of Poland, Slovakia, Hungary and Ukraine. This would identify species of plants, animal and birds. Such a plan would create a body of environmental data of high value to ecologists, of great use in measuring impacts on the environment from the development proposed for the region, and as an attraction to eco-tourism. The creation of such a Reserve could be done throughout the region using school children, who could help collect data under the direction of trained environmentalists, and compiled by local people with the help of the Carpathian Euroregion Association.
„ Journalism. The role of a mass media and communication network is important to the Euroregion. It already exists, it is an inexpensive, and it can be used to build confidence in cooperation through the exchange of information across borders. Representatives of the media already hold joint meetings in the Carpathian Euroregion and supplements are added to local newspapers concerning transboundary events in the area. The Institute of EastWest Studies edits a newsletter The Carpathian Euroregion in the region's languages and English. More could be done.
Recommendations.
(1) Television and radio shows could exchange educational and environmental programmes among the four countries. Television centres from the countries could prepare a regular common broadcast by Polish, Ukrainian, Hungarian and Slovakian journalists concerning events and issues in the region.
(2) A lesson could be learned from the Middle East, where nightly newscasts are broadcast regionally across borders and staggered so that viewers may watch as many as three different news shows. Once every evening all television stations in the Carpathian Euroregion could show regional news telecasts. For example, news from Hungary at 6:00 pm (1800), news from Slovakia at 6:15 (1815), news from Poland at 6:30 (1830) and news from Ukraine at 6:45 (1845). To be really creative, a respected journalist from each country -- perhaps broadcast from his/her home studio and linked through the network -- might then comment on the news from 6:45 to 7:00 (1845-1900).
This would create a means for people to hear various views on events, and could serve as a confidence-building measure by opening up the sources of news reports. The effect in the Middle East, for example, is one of comparative analysis among viewers; What do the Israelis report about this event; then the Egyptians and then the Jordanians? Another effect is to understand what is seen as news to different peoples and countries.
Lack of information, which is usually the result of isolation and national prejudicies are challenges and barriers. Neighboring societies now know each other poorly. Political positions are generally "brought" from the capitals to the local level, a residue of the former communist system when the lower level of civil society had to make policy following the lead of the upper level. Mass communication can overcome that imbalance and unfairness. It could also bring greater understanding of minorities and other cultures.
„ Financial Institutions.
The easy flow of capital across borders makes business easier. This creates openness and jobs which in turn brings cooperation and stability to a region. New enterprises are planned for the Carpathian Euroregion, but they will need external capital. Therefore, new legal provisions regarding the financial system will also be necessary.
Today, different systems of banking law sometimes make the flow of a capital and money for products and services impossible. In the case of Ukraine, it is now difficult to use Ukrainian banks for regulating of financial duties because of restrictions held over from the previous system. Trade between small enterprises requires payment by cash which is sometimes carried across the border in suitcases. This is illegal, but it is the only method available at the time.
Chambers of Commerce have been established to support and encourage economic cooperation, but their activity is limited by legal provisions and a lack of legal regulation. The result is that a large part of trade is exercised without taxes and without any control. Local authorities tolerate this situation in spite of the fact that they have no direct incomes because of such terms of trade. They know that a lot of shops, workshops and bars exist and earn money spent by Ukrainian "businessmen" in Polish shops or market places which allows people to be employed. For example, in Przemysl (a town on the Polish-Ukrainian border) there are many shops selling goods which are attractive to the nearby Ukrainians. The regional authorities of Przemysl estimate that border trade is the primary source of finance for about 15,000 people -- no small figure in Przemyl where the number unemployed is 37,000 in a population of 000000 [IZA: What is the population of Przemysl?].
Recommendations:
(1) Banking and Banking Laws. The creation of an Interregional Bank should help to solve the problem of money flow and common financing. The Council of Euroregion is supporting this activity and I encourage others to join them, especially the local Chambers of Commerce.
The problem of national currencies moving freely cross international borders is not a significant one. But it could be. For now, I suggest that local banks do what is done along the US-Canadian border, or within the EU: post the exchange rates and exchange one country's currency for the host country's. Local businesses might follow the same example, with a small handling charge added on. In the United States, for example, Canadian coins are often handled at par with U.S. coins (although actually worth only 70% of the U.S. coin's value), simply because of convenience. Canadian dollars, however, are charged at the international currency rate.
Banking law reform is a major issue in Central Europe, and one that must be addressed at the national level before EU admission is granted. It is unlikely that much can be done at the local Euroregion level, except to demonstrate that the free flow of goods and services across an open border depend on the free flow of currencies across the same border. The Carpathian Euroregion could demonstrate the viability of this through the examples stated above. Currency acceptance is a major first step. Ease of loaning currency is another. Both could be facilitated through a Euroregion inter-regional bank and by local cooperation among merchants through Chambers of Commerce.
The free exchange of money, and the local respect for the currency of a neighboring country, are forms of not only economic vitality, but also confidence building. Investors and consumers can act openly and freely, which in turn creates an atmosphere of sharing and cooperation.
(2) Taxes. This term is an anathema to cooperation. But a small, shared local tax could be specifically ear-marked for local projects, enterprises and investments. Three things would occur: (a) a fair tax would be collected; (b) a mutual agreement reached over collection of taxes, and respect for currencies and equalization of the tax burden would be achieved; (c) local projects could be built or undertaken.
Fundamentally, this is a system of financing local enterprises. One example is the improvement of the airports in Rzeszow, Lvov or Kosice as an inter-regional airports. This could become a common project, so that inter-regional airports would be funded by a specific local tax. The airports themselves would further link the region and its economic development.
(3) Other Funding. Another source of funds is the Fund for the Development of the Carpathian Euroregion (FDCE); this includes Poland, Ukraine, Slovakia, Hungary and also Romania. The FDCE funds and assists efforts to strengthen local democracy and the development of civil societies, and promotes trans-frontier and regional cooperation. The FDCE provides grants to non-profit and local government organisations. It also supports development of citizen participation, initiative and self-help, education, training, conflict prevention and tolerance promotion. Additional grants can assist local government development and capacity building including support for innovative models of regional community development.
„ Open Borders
One of the remaining problems concerns opening the borders between the Carpathian Euroregion countries. Along the Ukrainian border, for example, waiting to cross now causes long delays. Also, there are too few places to cross. Sometimes it is necessary to drive a hundred kilometers in order to meet with someone who actually lives a few kilometers away, because the number of border-crossing points is too few. This discourages contacts and impedes commerce. Everyone suffers. The next problem is connected with moving the line of cars and trucks more rapidly through the border. The vehicles now have to wait several days before crossing.
One result is a new railway crossing on the Polish-Ukrainian border at Krocienko-Chyrow which opend in May 1994. In July 1994, another opening was created on the Polish-Slovakian border in Konieczna.
Recommendation:
(1) In order to qualify for admission into the EU, the countries of Central Europe will have to demonstrate a willingness to open their borders. There is no better place to start than within the Carpathian Euroregion. This area already has demonstrated high levels of transboundary cooperation. The opening of borders in this region would therefore create a major first step along the path to open borders in Central Europe.
There is, indeed, nothing for countries to fear about this process. No modern armies will stride through these open borders; in fact, with satellite observation, no modern army can even leave its barracks without being observed. Commerce will improve, unemployment decrease as transboundary job opportunities rise.
The use of radio and television is an easy initial step. The media can be used to inform civil society regarding laws and normative behaviour. Television and radio could be used to put forth and make clear new financial opportunities -- employment openings, loan information, currency exchanges, how-to information -- on a regular basis. In fact, the media and other institutions could be used to address and overcome the political obstacles that the region faces, clarify local rights and laws; as stated, media could also be used to start the process of understand minotiry and human rights issues.
In the case of political obstacles and minority rights, the EU may be in a position to compel by example and requirements the governments of Central and Eastern Europe to cooperate with one another and with EU strictures. The time is ripe. Already in 1996 Prime Minister Meciar is visiting the European Parliament to plead his country's efforts at improvement. He could look to the eastern end of Slovakia for a place to start. Cooperation on the issues of democracy and minority rights -- governance and civil society -- could be achieved along the international borders of Slovakia, Hungary, Poland, Ukraine and Romania where the largest Euroregion in Europe is already in place and active.
Transboundary cooperation at this local level would demonstrate the sincerity of the leaders of Central and Eastern Europe to meet EU requirements. The Carpathian Euroregion is an excellent model for such a demonstration; cooperation is underway in the areas of environment, tourism, economic developmen, civil society and local governance. Individual contacts between local governments and authorities create other opportunities for common activities of mutual benefit. Demonstrate democracy, human rights, open borders, economic exchange and vitality in the Carpathian Euroregion and the EU will sit up and take notice. One sure step is regular contacts across borders which allow a common strategy for cooperation to take place. This builds the first bridges.
Bibliography
Documents, Reports
„ The Constitution of the Hungarian Republic
„ The elections of 1990 in Central, Eastern and Southeastern Europe, Atlas of Eastern and Southeastern Europe, No 6, 1-G-3, (1991) by …sterreichisches Ost- und SŸdosteuropa-Institut, Wien.
„ European Parliament, Note on the political situation in Poland, 26 October 1994, JPC/GH/md, 1990.
„ Evi LXV. TšrvŽny a helyi šnkorm‡nyzatokr—l, Lwa LXV on Local Fovernment, Hat‡lyos magyar jogszab‡lyok Hungarian Rules of Law in Force (15 November 1991) Budapest.
„ General elections in Hungary 94, Special Issue, (1994) Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Budapest,
„ Hungarian Act No XXIII of 1992 On the Public Servants, Budapest.
„ Hungarian Act LXXVII of 1993 On the Rights of National and Ethnic Minorities, Budapest.
„ Komornicki P. (1994). Cooperation within the Carpathian Euroregion with respect to the development of tourism (unpublished manuscript).
„ "A short history of coalition governments in Hungary," (1994) Fact Sheets on Hungary, No 5, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Budapest,
„ "National and Ethnic minorities in Hungary", (1991) Facts Sheets on Hungary, No 9, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Budapest.
„ The Slovak Republic in a nutshell, (1993) compiled by Trade Links: Prague.
„ņst. z‡k. c 556/1990 Zb., ktor«ym sa meni a dopl'na œstawn«y z‡kon c. 143/1968 Zb., o ceskoslovenskej feder‡cii (Czech. Const. Act No. 556/1990 Coll. of Laws, altering Czech. Const. Act No. 143/1968 Coll. of Laws, on the Czechoslovak Federation).
„ ņstava Slovenskej Republiki (Constitution of the Slovak Republik).
„ Ustawa z dnia 7 kwietnia 1989 roku, Prawo o stowarzyszeniach Dz.U. 1989, Nr 20, poz.104; z 1990 Nr 14, poz. 86.
„ Ustawa z dnia 8 marca 1990 r. o samorz'dzie terytorialnym, Dziennik Ustaw Nr 16, poz. 95, Nr 32, poz. 191, Nr 34, poz. 199, Nr 43, poz. 253, Nr 89, poz. 518, and 1991 r. Nr 4, poz.18, Nr 110, poz. 473; 1992 r. Nr 85, poz. 428, Nr 100, poz.499 (The Self-government Act of 8 March 1990).
„ Ustawa z dnia 8 marca 1990 roku Ordynacja wyborcza do rad gmin, Dziennik Ustaw nr 16 z 1990, poz. 96 and 1991 Nr 53, poz. 227 (The electoral Act to Community Councils).
„ Ustawa Konstytucyjna z dnia 17 pa«zdziernika 1992 o wzajemnych stosunkach miedzy wladza ustawodawcza i wykonawcza Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej oraz samorzadzie terytorialnym, Dz. U. No. 84, poz. 426 (The Constitution of Poland).
„ Ustava Slovenkej Republiky, Telegraf 7. 9. '92 (The Constitution of Slovakia).
„ The Verkhovna Rada elections in Ukraine, March 27 to April 10 1994, Report of the Democrtatic elections in Ukraine Observation and Coordination Centre, (1994) Part One: Kyiv.
„ The Vienna Institute Monthly Report, (1994). No. 8-9.
„ Zakon Slovenskej n‡rodnej rady zo 6. septembra 1990, Zbierka z‡konov Ceskej a Slovenskej Federat’vnej Republiky, Rocn’k 1990, Ciastka 60, and No. 369, 1991, No 130, 1991 No 421.
„ Zakon Ukrainy O formirovani miestnyh organov vlasti i samoupravlienja, Kiev, 3 fevralja 1994 goda.
Articles
„ Allison R. (1993). Security Issues in Ukraine Relations with Eastern, Central and Western Europe, Politichna dumka, (Political Thought), No 1, 207-212
„ Golembski, F. (1994). Grupa Wyszehradzka - pr—ba realizacji koncepcji ielostronnej wsp—lpracy w Europie Srodkowej, Sprawy Miźdzynarodowe, 3 (XLVII), 59-72.
„ Kolankiewicz, G. (1994). Consensus and Competition in the Eastern Enlargement of the European Union. International Affairs, No 3.
„ Kolar, P., Pick, O. & Polreich, M. (1993). The End of Czechoslovakia: Security Implications for Central Europe. Perspectives. Review of Central European Affairs, No 1, 27-37.
„ Kuzniar, R. (1994). Euroregion Karpacki - przeslanki powstania, uwarunkowania wsp olpracy, Sprawy Miźdzynarodowe, 3 (XLVII), 73- 100.
„ Olechowski, A. (1994). Polska i kszta³towanie przysz³oœci Europy, Sprawy Miźdzynarodowe, 3 (XLVII), 7-16.
„ Tolstov, S. (1994). The Foreign Policy of Ukaine: An Adjustment to a New Geopolitical Environment, Demos, Vol. I, No 4, 5-7.
Books
„ Boros, J. (1993). Some questions of Hungarian-Slovak relations. In the History & Politics, editor Dusan Kov‡c. Bratislava Symposium held on November 12-15, 1992, Bratislava: Czecho-Slovak Committee of the European Cultural Foundation, Bratislava.
„ The Carpathian Euroregion Project, (September 1999) Atlanta Bardejov Debrecen Krosno Uzhorod: Institute for EastWest Studies,
„ Dahrendorf, R. (1990) Transitions: Politics, Economies, and Liberty, Washington Quarterly, 13 no. 3
„ Gurr, R. (1993) Minorities at Risk: A Global View of Ethnopolitical Conflicts, Washington D.C.: United States Institute of Peace Press,
„ Mathernova Katarina, (1993) Czecho? Slovakia: Constitutional Disappointments in Constitution Making in Eastern Europe, edited by A. E. Dick Howard, Published by The Woodrow Wilson Center Press,
„ Paczolay, P. (1993) The New Hungarian Constitutional State: Challenges and Perspectives in Constitution Making in Eastern Europe, edited by A. E. Dick Howard, Woodrow Wilson Center Press
„ Rapaczynski, Andrzej. Constitutional Politics in Poland, in Constitution Making in Eastern Europe, (1993) edited by A. E. Dick Howard, Woodrow Wilson Center Press, , pg. 93-98
„ Regulska, J. (1993) Self-Governance or Central Control? in Constitution Making in Eastern Europe, edited by A. E. Dick Howard, Woodrow Wilson Center Press,
„ The Slovak Republic in a nutshell, 1993, compiled by Trade Links: Prague.
„ Ust. zak. c. 556/1990 Zb., ktorym sa meni a dopl'na œstawny z‡kon c. 143/1968 Zb., o ceskoslovenskej feder‡cii (Czech. Const. Act No. 556/1990 Coll. of Laws, altering Czech. Const. Act No. 143/1968 Coll. of Laws, on the Czechoslovak Federation).
„ ņstava Slovenskej Republiki (Constitution of Slovak Republic) .
„ Ustawa z dnia 7 kwietnia 1989 roku, Prawo o Stowarzyszeniach Dz. U. 1989
No. 20, poz. 104; z 1990 No. 14, poz. 86.
„ Ustawa z dnia 8 marca 1990 r. o samorz'dzie terytorilnym, Dziennik Ustaw No. 16, pos. 95, No. 32, poz. 191, No. 34, poz. 199, No. 43, poz. 253, No. 89, poz. 518, and 1991.