The government is removing the booth revolutionary statement from public institutions

Viktor Orbán on a Wednesday night ordered by government decisionto remove from public institutions the 11 years hanging there Declaration of National Cooperation. Shortly after Fidesz came to power in 2010, the parliament adopted the text presented by Orbán, which marks the period between the change of regime and the NER. for two confusing decades declared and stated that ‘the Hungarian nation regained its vitality in the spring of 2010 and carried out a successful revolution in the polling stations”. In practice, this was the founding document of the NER, stated in the intoxication of victory with the new two-thirds:

“With this historic act, it obliged the incoming Parliament and the new government to lead the work with which Hungary will build the System of National Cooperation with determination, uncompromising and unshakable.”

It is no coincidence that the government considered the text so important that it placed it in a separate decree at least fifty times seventy centimeters as a color print in public institutions.

However, this era is now over, according to Wednesday’s government decision to replace NENYI as the preamble to the Basic Law. National Creed is 500 × 700 mm in size, standing in a rectangular frame should be included in color format. The heads of public institutions must ensure that the previously issued National Co-operation Declarations are removed.

The text of this was written by József Szájer together with Gergely Gulyás. One was told in an interview volumethat there were debates in Fidesz as to what the text should be called, whether the word creed could be used, or rather it should be called a statement. “THE Fidesz and the KDNP faction voted for it because there were Reformed objections to the issue. ”said Szájer. And Goulash confessed that “I voted for the term “national declaration” because I, as a Reformed, immediately remembered the Helvetic creed as a Reformed word.”.

The government justifies that now “az Respecting the adoption of the Basic Law for 10 years and considering the importance of the National Creed of the Basic Law”The text will be replaced by NENYI in public institutions. It is the responsibility of the heads of public institutions to make the boxed textdignified and in a conspicuous place in accordance with the characteristics of the public building ’. And take the old one. This applies to the central government administrative bodies, the military organizations of the Armed Forces, the central state administration bodies and their territorial and local bodies, as well as the general territorial administrative bodies of the government.

At the same time, the government includes the President of the Republic, the Speaker of the National Assembly, the President of the Constitutional Court, the President of the Curia, the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights, the President of the State Audit Office, the President of the Magyar Nemzeti Bank, the it also asks the heads of prosecutors’ offices to do the same, although this is not in principle binding on them, given the constitutional principle of the separation of powers.

In the aforementioned interview volume, Szájer also remarked on the National Creed: “It was clear from the beginning that there needed to be a social self-definition. Many critics have put it this way, the more problematic the psyche of a nation is, the longer it tells in the preamble about its own identity. I do not question that the perception of identity and the relation of oneself to Hungarian society is seriously problematic. There are still plenty of unresolved, unclear issues. For this, the XX. The historical horrors of the 16th century contributed significantly. The desperate ideological debates that have now taken place under democratic conditions have often further removed the agreement. It is undeniable that the self-definition formulated in the National Creed – due to the number of unresolved questions – is much more extensive than usual. But let us not forget that this is not a traditional preamble that states: who constitutes, for what purpose, under what circumstances and under what authority. The aim was to make the preamble to the Basic Law part of the formulation of national identity. ”

– .