Search

Treaty of Trianon, an international document of unquestionable political-legal value and, at the same time, of capital value for Romania, which certifies the full legitimacy of its existence inside its current borders - also including Transylvania -, is unconditionally fully valid and thus remains as such, having been applied for a century. It is for the Romanians to comply with the sacred duty to know its provisions as rigorously as possible and to ensure, at any cost and without any hesitation, the strict observance of its provisions. Under no circumstance it is admitted a hesitating or passive attitude, without reply when its validity is questioned. Thus, it is created the impression that Romania would agree that the Treaty of Trianon is no longer of interest to the Romanian State or that there would be some indifference to the regulations which it contains, favouring confusions and forming opinions that prejudice the value of this Treaty. This study presents the context in which the Treaty of Trianon was negotiated and reached the signing; the Paris Peace Conference (1918-1920) is described and the principles underlying it and the decisions adopted are mentioned. Similarly, the author makes a characterization of the treaties signed after the end of the First World War and it is mentioned that the principle of nationalities was laid at the foundation of the new order in Europe. The Paris Peace Conference put an end to the oppressive empires, and the liberated nations were constituted in sovereign national states, and, as the case may be, new states emerged, while others were reformed or reunited - this being also the case of the achievement of Greater Romania. In the final part of the study, it is described the series of irredentist attempts started since the Paris Peace Conference (1918-1920) and continued throughout the entire century, to revise or even repeal the Treaty of Trianon. The most brutal action in this regard was the Vienna Arbitration (30 August 1940), which fortunately was annulled by the Paris Peace Treaty (1947), which declared it null and void. The Treaty of Understanding, Cooperation and Good Neighbourliness between Romania and the Hungarian Republic (1996) - necessary, of course, and useful insofar as it would be applied in good faith by both parties - contains nevertheless a series of extreme concessions granted by the Romanian side, that a kind of condominium has been created in the area where a population of Hungarian ethnicity is located next to Romanians. It is especially surprising that, although there is a provision regarding the intangibility of the borders, in the Treaty of 1996 it is not mentioned the Treaty of Trianon under which they are established, which raises many questions. The author does not overlook that, given that the Romanian citizens of Transylvania - Hungarian or even Romanian - are granted Hungarian citizenship, an attempt is made to extend the jurisdiction of Hungary on the territory of Romania, and the massive acquisition of property in Transylvania by Hungarian citizens aims to create a situation favourable for Hungary and to the detriment of Romania. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The elections of May 1990 marked the Romanians' choice of going out of the communist dictatorship, not one for liberal democracy. The Romanian society embraced the „values” of national-communism as they had been propagated by Nicolae Ceausescu's regime and the awareness of the democratic values was not fully realized even until today. This is the explanation for the categorical victory of FSN and Ion Iliescu, considered liberators of the society from the dictatorship of Nicolae Ceausescu, but also guarantors of a continuity that would protect the society from fears of the transition to capitalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

How could a state and its leadership abandon without resistance millions of its citizens and almost a third of its territory, like Romania did in 1940? It's a disturbing question and simply blaming the external factors is not sufficient, nor fair to the Romanian society. The events from the summer of 1940 are all the more shocking considering that the regime the King himself and his regime were pushing the pedal of nationalism, promising the citizens of Greater Romania that every swath of land will be defended under any circumstances, at any cost. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Annals of 'Constantin Brancusi' University of Targu-Jiu. Juridical Science Series is the property of Universitatea Constantin Brancusi din Targu-Jiu and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In the present survey, the author assumed the difficult - because of its complexity - and delicate task, but at the same time, praiseworthy one, to give the appropriate answer to the question who is rightly the competent authority for representing a State in its international relations and even more precisely, who is the State representative in an international organization - the Head of State (President or Monarch) or the Government of this State? Searching for the right and legitimate solution in such a conflictual political competition (in Romania this issue being now highly debated), the author explored deeply and carefully, the approaches and the adopted solutions of the present practice in various countries and international organizations as well; on such a foundation, as a starting point, he explained the real meaning of the traditional saying "ius repraesentationis omnimodae" as a result of its evolution in the contemporary life: this miraculous but ambiguous formula changed its original connotation, its validity is uncertain and has to be taken into account more cautiously. No need to say that, in addition to Constitutional rules of the concerned country (its legislation), we have to take into consideration the rules of the respective international organization. Undertaking a thoroughly research on the general practice in this field, the author came at the Romanian case and examined carefully and in detail, the Constitutional rules. The article saying that "Romanian President represents the Romanian State" has to be interpreted in the light of art. 91, which states that Government is entitled to negotiate treaties on behalf of Romania and not the President. Consequently, the scope of representation conferred to the President is limited to the strict and pure representation and is not exceeding political representation. So that the Romanian Government must take part in the EU. Commission, any time that are adopted engaging decisions (as a result of multilateral negotiations), because these are matters within its powers. In our next Constitution, all these questions must be regulated in the most appropriate way, with clear and coherent Constitutional texts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Metrologie is the property of Biroul Roman de Metrologic Legala - Institutul National de Metrologie and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)