This year marks a quarter of a century since the fall of communism and the beginning of the transition to democracy in Central and Eastern Europe. CEU's Center for EU Enlargement Studies (CENS) invited experts to assess the quality of democracy within those first 25 years in terms of liberties, human rights, equalities, pluralism, and the value of citizenship at a June 2 conference.
“If we look back at 1989, we thought maybe after 12 years we would reach the quality of Western democracies,” said CENS Director Professor Peter Balazs, who has served in numerous Hungarian and EU government positions since 1969. “We believed that three elections would make it possible for political parties to be tested, followed by stabilization. It didn't happen overnight – it was a long process that is still ongoing.”
Balazs, who served as Hungary's minister of foreign affairs from 2009-2010, gave a short overview of the domestic situation, tracing the “hibernation” and disappearance ofsome political parties and, importantly, the rise of right-of-center and far-right parties. Economically, Hungary was hit hard by the Eurocrisis and it has been slow to bounce back. Balazs noted the low investment rate in Hungary as well as the fact that an estimated 600,000 Hungarians – “the highest number since World War II” – are working outside Hungary, in old EU member states. Education and healthcare are declining, he noted, and civil society has become mostly ineffective in voicing opposing opinions.
An important conduit for opposing opinions and a tenet of democracy is media. CEU Professor of Public Policy Miklos Haraszti said media freedom is not just on the decline in Central and Eastern Europe, but globally. “Suppression of pluralism is the main weapon,” he noted. “This is a model that is spreading throughout the world – in Zimbabwe, in many East Asian countries, in several Latin American countries, and South Africa.”
Media that is controlled by one person or entity is rampant in Eastern Europe, where wealthy oligarchs “try to make a political life through media,” said Haraszati, who directed the media freedom watchdog institution of the 56-nation Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) from 2004-2010. It happens in Western countries as well, with media moguls like Italy's Berlusconi who dominated Italian politics for nearly a decade as prime minister.
On the surface, in some Central and Eastern European countries, there may appear to be media choice for consumers but, often in reality many media entities are either strictly for entertainment (a commercial, money-making venture for their owners) or mouthpieces of the government. There are still – even in Hungary – some independent print press outlets, but “they suffer from constant persecution that's even built into the law,” Haraszati said. “The tricks are endless and are making independent media weaker and weaker.” Key to pluralism, he said, is that these independent units need to be strong enough to perform and withstand oppression from government.
Hungary has a strong tradition of freedom of press but it was never able to thrive without interruption due to numerous wars and revolutions, said Peter Molnar, senior fellow at CENS.
“As part of this tradition, in 1992, there was a constitutional principle laid out by the constitutional court that no political, economic, or other social group should have decisive influence over the media system. This should have safeguarded the autonomy of the media,” he said. “Implementing this principle was easier in the 1990s when the governing majority didn't have a two-thirds majority in parliament. From 1994, the socialist liberal government did have a two-thirds majority – they could've done whatever they wanted – but they exercised self-restraint. Since 2010, the two-thirds majority has not exercised self-restraint.” In December of that year, the Hungarian Parliament adopted a new, widely criticized media law that prompted significant domestic protests as well as harsh criticism from the EU Parliament which issued a resolution expressing its concern from freedom of speech and media pluralism.
Turning from media issues to minority issues, Vizi Balazs from the Institute for Minority Studies at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences spoke about how minority rights have changed as the EU has expanded. Member states didn't deem human rights issues that imp in 1990s, he said, and the EU Commission failed to provide a clear and coherent approach to minority issues in the Central and Eastern European region, partly because they there was no existing legal framework on which to build. This translated into raising the discourse and debate over minority rights and the need for legal instruments during the EU enlargement process.
“In Western European countries, there is a constitutional framework in which these debates can be framed. Even the question of independence in Scotland is in the constitution of the UK,” Balazs said. “The EU is hampered in addressing minor issues because there is no consensus regarding how to deal with it. All EU member states are very keen on keeping ethnic debates within their own border – they are not willing to concede on this area.”
He noted that there have been only two major development in EU minority rights since the 2007 Lisbon Treaty. The first was extending the Agency of Fundamental Rights, which is responsible for giving recommendations and monitoring member state and EU institutions' policies. The agency is, however, quite weak in Balazs's eyes, as they do not have the power to change policies.
The other development is the EU Roma Integration Strategy that was adopted in 2011 and focuses on showing general principles which could lead member states in adopting special strategies. “The problem with this framework is that is focuses exclusively on social and economic issues,” Balazs said. “It doesn't offer a clear benchmark that's expected to be reached and when.”
Finally, CEU Associate Professor of Gender Studies Andrea Peto and CEU Research Fellow at

the Center for Policy Studies Attila Bartha discussed gender issues and looking to non-EU examples to help “re-invent” the EU. “Progressive politics is facing a deep challenge,” Peto said “Why is it losing attraction? Unresolved conflict of women's participation in progress politics is one of the reasons it's losing its popular support. The story, the narrative, of progressive politics needs to be rewritten. I want to answer how progressive politics is shaping social imaginary – how gender differences are conceptualized in social imaginary.”
Bartha wondered if the EU can adopt new potential drivers that differ from the traditional European market drivers. He stressed the significance of policy transfer and exchange of ideas and best practices by way of the Open Method of Coordination (OMC). He sees great potential in the Nordic model that is innovative, inclusive, sustainable, and focused on social investment. He noted that not only is their policy progressive, but also their entire democratic process, with strong veto players, a moderate level of polarization, and consensus-oriented behavior. “Procedural and participatory components of democracy – active citizens, NGOs, and educational efforts – should strengthen expertise.”
The event was co-sponsored by the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung Foundation. For the complete program, visit http://www.ceu.hu/sites/default/files/attachment/event/9923/conference-program_0.pdf.





