1988. január (1-16. szám) / HU_BFL_XIV_47_2

UlM>í^^h ml

24/D í-ittle Roísell Stre«t, LÓN D 0 NI, WlC.i • Te/. CH-450 H 26 • G. Rrassó 15/1988 (E) 30th January, 1988

Hungárián Democratic Fórum, in the Jurta Theatre

The Hungárián Democratic Fórum which was established on September 27th at the Lakitelek meeting of intellectuals held its first large scale conference on Saturday January 30th in the Jurta Theatre which was opened last year in the Népliget (Public Park). More than 500 representátivés of all the groups of intellectuals demanding democratic reforms took part in the programme which lasted from 10 am until 7 in the evening. Up until the last moment the Party debated whether to permit the conference to take piacé or nőt: a few days ago they threat- ened to swamp the hall with the Party faithful bút in the end - on the contrary - they prohibited those Party members who were due to speak from taking part. There- fore the law professor Péter Schmidt, the political scientist and university lecturer Mihály Bihari and the májőrity of the invited parliamentary representátivés - fór example Zoltán Király from Szeged - did nőt lecture or speak at the conference.

Imre Pozseav. the generál secretary of the Patriotic Peoples Front, who had spoken at Lakitelek and had published the Lakitelek meeting’s common declaration in the Hungárián daily Magyar Nemzet (Hungárián Nation) did nőt appear either.

The 28 lecturers and speakers at the day-long conference spoke about Hungárián society’s most burning problems today: they sought the answer to how, through reforms, it would be possible to emerge from the crisis which the official policy of the last decades had created. István Csurka spoke of a double crisis: the lesser one being that which is apparent to everyone in economy and policy and in which it "is alsó possible to die", and the more profound one being the interruption of a historical process. Gyula Fekete emphasised that it was nőt necessary to create parties of opposition bút to strengthen democratic institutions and Hungárián con- sciausness, conversely others spoke fór the introduction of political plurálisra and a multi-party system. Many spoke about the role of parliamentarism, fór example Dénes Csengey and Imre Mécs who proposed to reform the election system and direct popular participation in decision making - the organisation of referenduma. Árpád Göncz demanded a proper legal circumscription of the institutions’ functions.

László Sólyom thought it necessary to establish expert and direct popular represent- ative bodies and to create offices fór the parliamentary representátivés. Similarly Gábor Czako emphasised the importance of decision making by competent and interested parties. Ferenc Kőszeg*s speech concemed the legal system, he analysed paragraphs from the passport law which could be utilized fór political discrimination purposes.

Many of them brought up the question of defending the Hungárián national minorities living in neighbouring countries. There were those who emphasised the importance of social welfare; Gáspár Miklo's Tamás, fór example, spoke about the objectives of the recently established Independent Commission fór Refugees, Géza Németh called attention to the significance of those groups who grant aid from religous conviction. Others, like Imre Makovecz said that the task of the state was to defend the law of the Hungarians.

During the meeting subjects were raised which had, until this time, been taboos. One of the speakers insisted on the withdrawal of the Soviet army, a worker from Csepel spoke of how Party bodies threaten workers who are critical. György Konrad compared---------------------T---------------------------