Ciudățenia opiniei disidente în cauza Tőkés c. României
The strangeness of the dissent opinion in the case Tőkés v. Romania

Summary/Abstract: The ECHR decision from 27 April 2021 in the case Tőkés v. Romania is a key step in the “flag wars” started at the beginning of the ‘90s and which are still continuing today. Based on this framing of the issue, the article focuses on the observations submitted by the Governmental Agent and highlights his endorsement of the anti-minority tenets that have dominated the post-Communist policy of the Romanian state; and his distorted interpretation of recommendations and conventions that Romania has promoted and signed. I analyze the content of the dissent opinion in the ECHR case from 27 April 2021, signed by judges Iulia Antoanella Motoc and Gabriele Kucsko-Stadlmayer. This opinion reinterprets the decision of the majority and suggests how the national courts should (not) take into account the decision given by the Court in Strasbourg in the case Tőkés v. Romania – an incitement to disregard the position of the ECHR. I argue that, seen as a whole, the institutional behavior of the police and Prosecutor’s Office and the behavior of the institutions at the interface between the Romanian state and international organizations (the Governmental Agent, the judge sent by the Romanian state to ECtHR) is the expression of a „systemic anti-Hungarianism”.

• Details
• Contents