Petőcz Kálmán (szerk.): National Populism and Slovak - Hungarian Relations in Slovakia 2006-2009 (Somorja, 2009)
Grigorij Mesežnikov: National Populism in Slovakia - Defining the Character of the State and Interpreting Select Historic Events
Grigorij Mesežnikov ethnic minorities, particularly ethnic Hungarians, were discouraged from endorsing the new country by nationalism that was manifested on the level of state minority policy in the field of education, culture and use of native languages. The mentioned circumstances and phenomena created within society favourable conditions for emergence and growth of mass displays of disagreement, protests and support for alternative political concepts. Although representatives of then-ruling parties proclaimed their respect for democratic principles and standards, political practice often contradicted these declarations. Symptomatic in this context was their justification of power measures that flew in the face of democratic standards and traditions as well as arguments they used to dismiss criticism (coming both from within and abroad) the Mečiar administration faced for its authoritarian practices. Ruling politicians tried to raise among citizens a permanent sense of threat to the fundaments of Slovak statehood; they often put this danger in the context with activities of domestic political opponents, particularly parliamentary opposition and independent media. Relatively shortly after seizing power in the early elections of 1994, the SNS and HZDS came up with an idea of adopting a special act that was supposed to protect state and its institutions as part of the penal law. In fact, it was motivated by the intention to punish citizens who participated in opposition political activities, championed different political concepts including a different understanding of power execution and spread abroad such information on the country’s internal development the incumbent administration considered “false” or “untrue”. In April 1996, Prime Minister and HZDS Chairman Vladimir Mečiar said in justification of the necessity to pass a “law on the protection of the republic” (an amendment to the Criminal Code) that Slovakia needed such legislation due to “permanent and intensifying assaults on government organs that are designed to bring about their moral and political disintegration and discredit them in the eyes of the public regardless of facts”.4 The proposed amendment to the Criminal Code even sought to protect the state against opinions ruling parties viewed as “unreasonable” and aimed “against statehood”. Parliament Chairman Ivan Gašparovič (HZDS) declared that Slovakia is “truly a small and young state that needs to have certain defence systems in the beginning that would eliminate those not always reasonable opinions of some people who within young Slovakia seek to materialize certain measures that are aimed against statehood of the Slovak Republic”.5 MP Kamil Hat’apka (SNS) seconded this view by saying that his party considered it inevitable to put through such legislative measures that should prevent “displays of bias and questioning of Slovak 46
