Discourse

Constitutional Guarantees of Democratic Political Discourse in Central and Eastern Europe

Dear Colleague,

I would be grateful, if you could contribute to my research by answering this short questionnaire.
You are kindly invited to join this project, as a national expert of your country. Having further comments or questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

About the research

The project is titled “The Constitutional Guarantees of Democratic Political Discourse in Central and Eastern Europe”. We are looking for the constitutional guarantees of freedom of expression, the rights of public opinion (to be defined according to Habermas, it covers the citizens and the media) to gain information on public affairs.
The fundamental right of freedom of expression needs also the active role of the state as well, by creating the normative framework for political discussions and to connect them to each other. The focus points of these discourses are the parliamentary debates, the political (pre-election) campaigns and the media-debates; the research observes the legal guarantees that ensure the interconnections between them. It is necessary to involve also the constitutional practice in this field: decisions of the Constitutional Court or other high courts, the practice of state organs (i.e. electoral committees, media authority, parliamentary bodies) and the cases before the ECtHR.

About your contribution

In this research we need deeper information about the situation in the CEE countries. Legal and constitutional provisions are available in English on the internet and libraries, but there are several risks basing the research only on these sources: the translation or the widespread elements of practice.
We need the legal texts, the case law and scientific literature. If the official English translation of any of the documents/decisions/articles in question is available, just let me know the source.
If you think you could recommend other expert in your country to involve this research, please let me know.
Deadline for answering: 20 January 2014. If you need more time, let me know.

If you answer any of these questions, I would like to refer to your contribution in my articles, so please give me your name and institute (with your position).

Depending on further research funds, I am planning to organize an international conference on this topic in Hungary in 2014, and I would like to invite you to participate in it.

Best regards,

Dr. habil. Peter Smuk,
associate professor, Head of Department of Constitutional Law and Political Sciences
Széchenyi István University, Győr, Hungary
[email protected]

Your participation in this study is completely voluntary. There are no foreseeable risks associated with this project. However, if you feel uncomfortable answering any questions, you can withdraw from the survey at any point. It is very important for us to learn your opinions.

Thank you very much for your time and support. Please start with the survey now by clicking on the Continue button below.

Data (Name, Position, Institution, Country, e-mail):

Mark with X if you want to answer, but you don't want your name to be public:

Please indicate also the source of the legal texts and scientific publications if available in English.

The questions regard the recent situation in your country, but if you have data on the period since 1989, please include it in your answer.

I. PARLIAMENT (OPENNESS OF WORK) 1. Can you name cases when the Parliament (any of the houses) held a closed (in camera) session since 1989?

2. Is there any regulation on the openness of the chamber(s)? (for ex. visitors or journalists entrance to the galleries, etc.) Is it issued by the speaker of the Parliament or any other body? Is it controversial? Do you have Const. Court decision on it?

3. Is it possible for the private media to broadcast from the parliament with their own equipment or has the Parliament an own signal (from own cameras) to transmit?

4. What kind of means is available for the Speaker of the House to protect the “dignity of the House” against improper conducts of representatives, visitors or journalists?

5. Is it easy to get the journalist accreditation to the Parliament?

6. Do the parties/representatives use flash mobs in Parliament? Do they prefer other places (outside the Parliament) for media appearances? Can you describe any tendency regarding this in the last two decades?

7. Any further comments on the publicity (of the debates) of the Parliament:

PRE-ELECTION CAMPAIGN 1. Do the parties/candidates have free air time on public service (state) broadcast media?

Do the parties/candidates have free air time on private broadcast media?

2. If yes, how does the regulation distribute the time-frame among candidates/parties?

3. Are there public debates on broadcast media during the campaign, involving the relevant parties? What is the method to select the participants of such debates? (I.e.: which are “the relevant parties”? The time frame must be too short to invite all of the parties to the debate.)

4. Is it usual that smaller or opposition parties complain about being excluded from media coverage or debates during campaign? Can you name famous cases?

5. Are there limits or bans for paid political advertisements in a) public or b) private broadcast media?

6. Do any of the parties prefer other surfaces than classical broadcast and printed media or (giant) posters for campaigning? (I.e. social media, facebook, internet, assemblies, etc.)

7. Any further comments on the publicity of pre-election political campaigns:

Thank you very much for your answers!