Hungary: New Constitution Enshrines Discrimination
Baku, April 26 (AZERTAC). The new Hungarian constitution approved by parliament contains provisions that could lead to discrimination, Human Rights Watch said today. President Pál Schmitt should send the constitution back to Parliament to address these and other human rights issues, Human Rights Watch said.
The proposed constitution was passed on April 18, 2011, by a vote of 262 to 44, with 1 abstention. It includes provisions that could lead to discrimination against women, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people, and people with disabilities, Human Rights Watch said.
"The ruling Fidesz members of Parliament pushed through a constitution that puts Hungary at odds with its obligation to uphold and respect human rights," said Amanda McRae, a Western Balkans researcher for Human Rights Watch. "The president needs to use his authority to fix this fundamental document before it becomes law and enshrines discrimination."
Human Rights Watch is also concerned that civil society and opposition groups in Hungary were largely excluded from the process of drafting and reviewing the constitution. Numerous groups in and outside of Hungary called for essential changes and more time to debate and review the document, but the constitution, which was introduced for public debate in mid-March, passed the Parliament with few changes only a month later.
A new constitution requires the president`s signature to go into effect. President Schmitt is expected to sign it on April 25. However, under the current Hungarian constitution, (article 26) the president has the authority to refer a law or provisions with which he disagrees, along with his comments, back to the Parliament for reconsideration.
Human Rights Watch called on Schmitt to use this authority to ensure that the human rights concerns raised by Human Rights Watch and other groups are addressed.
"The process of drafting and passing the constitution was rushed and effectively excluded those who might have offered a different viewpoint," McRae said. "This raises serious questions about the legitimacy of the document.
Other news in this section
