Habersack, Sabine - Puşcaş, Vasile - Ciubotă, Viorel (szerk.): Democraţia in Europa centrală şi de Sud-Est - Aspiraţie şi realitate (Secolele XIX-XX) (Satu Mare, 2001)
Camil Mureşan: Câteva consideraţii cu privire la evoluţia democratică în Centrul şi Sud-Estul Europei
Camil Mureşan dualism, dividing the power between the superior German and Hungarian stratas (1867). This compromise was a stage - unfinished, of course - on the way of Monarchy's democratization. In Austria, first steps were the so called “Laws from December” (1867), that stipulated: equal rights for citizens, freedom of the consciousness and faith, property inviolability and article 19 was saying: “all nationalities have equal rights and inalienable rights to keep nationality and language”. These laws were followed by new ones, in the same spirit. Extremely interesting were the electoral settlements from 1905 in Moravia and 1910 for Bucovina area. They established for the first province two curias (German and Czech) and in the second one, four curias (German, Polish, Carpatho-Russian and Romanian). The electors voted in each nationality's curia. The number of deputies was established (theoretically, at least), in connection with the number of electors for each nationality. The Hungarian laws from 1868 stipulated equal rights for citizens, without recognizing a collective national personality. The citizens were able to use their own language in relationships with administration, law and in elementary and secondary schools (not in state schools, but in private and confessional ones). The suffrage varied between 3% and 6% of population, depending on the zone. Half of the Hungary's population were non-Hungarians, only 5% being represented in Parliament. Between 1879- 1907 the status of the Hungarian language was consolidated through several alterations of 1868 laws. Even some of the Hungarian historians are recognizing the fact that after 1890 there were no major reforms for democratic development. Yet, generally speaking, as concerns laws, judiciary and administrative procedures, the regime of the dualist Hungary was more correct that one may think. In Romania, the fundament for democracy was made by Alexandru loan Cuza. But the electoral system was narrow. The electoral qualification limited the access in the politic life (only few thousands citizens). Until 1921-23, formally, Romania was on the way to democracy, but the beneficiary was a minority, the superior category of the society. Until 1914, in Central and South-East Europe, the progresses of the democratic system were unequal, they didn't penetrated the depth of the political-social structures, the mentality. Not only the politic class, but intelectuality - at least, an idealistic part of it - was the sincere militant for modernization, democracy and politic honestity. One of the factors that deviated the process was the national challenge. Another factor was discrepancy between politic structures 28
