![]() |
![]() |
Beiträge zur Rechtsgeschichte Österreichs
|
![]() |
![]() |
I. Rechtsgeschichte des Mittelalters und der Frühen Neuzeit
|
![]() |
Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften Austrian Academy of Sciences Press
A-1011 Wien, Dr. Ignaz Seipel-Platz 2
Tel. +43-1-515 81/DW 3420, Fax +43-1-515 81/DW 3400 https://verlag.oeaw.ac.at, e-mail: verlag@oeaw.ac.at |
![]() |
|
DATUM, UNTERSCHRIFT / DATE, SIGNATURE
BANK AUSTRIA CREDITANSTALT, WIEN (IBAN AT04 1100 0006 2280 0100, BIC BKAUATWW), DEUTSCHE BANK MÜNCHEN (IBAN DE16 7007 0024 0238 8270 00, BIC DEUTDEDBMUC)
|
Beiträge zur Rechtsgeschichte Österreichs 10. Jahrgang Heft 2/2020, pp. 241-248, 2021/05/12
Mittel- und osteuropäische Rechtshistorische Konferenz 2019
Central and Eastern European Legal History Conference 2019
In 1926, the publicist Hugó Ignotus (1869–1949) and the sociologist Róbert Braun (1879–1937) debated in the Hungarian journal “Nyugat” the possible and desirable roles of referendums in the political system. This debate was unique because institutions of direct democracy were neither regulated nor practiced in Hungary at that time; not even in‐depth scientific or political discussions took place about the issue. Ignotus was of the opinion that referendums could – at least partly – take over the role of the parliament and be used as a controlling power against authoritarian leaders. He proposed to enable citizens to directly elect and dismiss the political leader and to lay down the guidelines for the government in referendums; the government should only elaborate and implement detailed regulations. Braun argued in his response that institutions of direct democracy cannot replace the representative power and that citizens should not be overburdened by too frequent referendums. Direct democracy may work as a corrective to the parliament but it is not suitable for preventing authoritarian tendencies. He also emphasized the importance of political maturity as a prerequisite for a convenient use of referendums and popular initiatives. Later developments justified Braun’s opinion. The article presents the standpoints of the discussion partners and places their views in the context of preceding and subsequent evolution.
Keywords: direct democracy– Hungary – interwar period – plebiscite – popular initiative – referendum