DOCSLIB.ORG

Roma As a Unique Cultural Minority: the Impact of Communism and Democratisation on Roma in Eastern Europe

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Roma As a Unique Cultural Minority: the Impact of Communism and Democratisation on Roma in Eastern Europe Durham E-Theses Roma as a Unique Cultural Minority: the Impact of Communism and Democratisation on Roma in Eastern Europe DANOVA, MILITSA,DANIELOVA How to cite: DANOVA, MILITSA,DANIELOVA (2011) Roma as a Unique Cultural Minority: the Impact of Communism and Democratisation on Roma in Eastern Europe, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/875/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk 2 Militsa Danielova Danova Roma as a Unique Cultural Minority: the Impact of Communism and Democratisation on Roma in Eastern Europe This thesis examines the socio-economic situation of Roma in three Eastern European countries: Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary. It observes that the governments of these three countries, to varying degrees, have failed to develop effective policies for improving the marginal situation of the Roma minority. My hypothesis is that one of the key factors explaining this failure is the fact that ‘the dominant group – ethnic minority’ relations in these countries have been based on a liberal as opposed to a multicultural model. An examination of the academic literature on accommodating ethnic minority rights reveals two main models that deal with the rights of minority cultures. The first, the liberal model, focuses on human rights and advances the idea that the best way to improve the quality of life of ethnic minorities would be to treat their members in the same way as the members of the dominant ethnic group. The second, the multicultural model, demands special protection of the culture of minority groups and views this as an essential precondition for improving the minority group’s socio-economic condition. The thesis argues that both the policies of the Eastern European governments, as well as the monitoring mechanisms adopted by the international community are based on the liberal approach which promotes the implementation of human rights standards. These policies have not been successful which in turn casts doubt on the suitability of the liberal model as a solution to the problematic situation of the Roma in the three Eastern European countries studied here. The thesis examines two other factors that explain the poor socio-economic status of Roma in Eastern Europe: the unique situation of the Roma minority as one lacking an external homeland that could support its minority abroad and the unique geo-political situation of these Eastern European countries whose other minorities do have external homelands and are seen as posing a security threat to the host countries. Thus the Roma suffer the twofold disadvantage of having no external protection and of being the target of the negative attitudes aimed at the other ethnic minority groups due to the perceived security threat to the territorial integrity of these states. The analysis demonstrates that the Roma minorities in Hungary fare better than in Bulgaria and Romania due to the lack of the above mentioned security issues vis-à-vis other ethnic minorities. ii Roma as a Unique Cultural Minority: the Impact of Communism and Democratisation on Roma in Eastern Europe Militsa Danielova Danova In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree PhD in Political Science Dissertation submitted to School of Government and International Affairs University of Durham March 2010 iii Table of Contents Introduction 1 1. Theoretical Debates on Rights for Ethnic Minority Groups 6 1.1. Introduction 6 1.2. Eastern Europe: nationalising states and minority rights 9 1.3. The liberal – multicultural debate 19 1.3.1. Ethnic groups and the state: defense of the state 20 1.3.2. The critique of cultural minority rights 23 1.3.3. Arguments in favor of minority rights 26 1.3.3.1. Context of choice, difficulty of exit, political visibility, and recognition 27 1.3.3.2. Redistribution as a necessary supplement to recognition 31 1.3.3.3. Legal and political inclusion of cultural difference 32 1.3.3.4. “Moral learning” as a step toward achieving social equality 37 1.3.3.5. The Roma and arguments in favour of group rights 39 1.4. Conclusion 41 2. Relevant International Instruments for Minority Protection: Is Roma Destiny Marginal to the Global Human Rights Agenda? (1648–2008) 44 2.1. Introduction 44 2.2. Historical overview of minority protection 46 2.2.1. Minority protection: from the Holy Roman Empire to the Congress of Berlin 46 2.2.1.1. The Holy Roman Empire: Post-Reformation developments 46 2.2.1.2. The Congress of Vienna (1814-1815) 48 2.2.2. The Congress of Berlin (1878): nationalism and external dictates of minority protection 49 2.2.3. The League of Nations (1919-1946): a system of minority iv treaty guarantees 50 2.3. Current international instruments for Roma protection 52 2.3.1. Overview 52 2.3.2. The United Nations: from group protection to an individualistic approach to the protection of minorities 52 2.3.2.1. Protection of physical integrity: the Genocide Convention 52 2.3.2.2. Protection of minority identity 54 2.3.2.2.1. UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 54 2.3.2.2.2. The UNESCO Declaration on Race and Racial Prejudice 56 2.3.2.3. The right to culture and minority protection: the UN Declaration on the Rights of Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities 58 2.3.2. The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) and Relevant Documents on Minority Protection 60 2.3.2.1. Individual rights for minorities: the Final Act of Helsinki 60 2.3.2.2. Further developments 61 2.3.3. Minority protection under the Council of Europe 63 2.3.3.1. Non-discrimination and the right to identity: The European Convention on Human Rights 63 2.3.3.2. Legally binding minority protection: Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities 65 2.4. Minority protection for the Roma 70 2.5. Identity and minority protection 73 2.6. Conclusion and outlooks 75 3. International Bodies That Monitor Standard Implementation: Rhetoric vs. Action (1947–2008) 77 3.1. Introduction 77 3.2. Office of the United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights 79 3.2.1. Background developments of the establishment of the Office 79 3.2.2. Goals and achievements of the OHCHR 81 v 3.2.3. Staffing and employment of the OHCHR 84 3.2.4. Budget of the OHCHR 86 3.2.5. The OHCHR’s Initiatives in Central and Eastern Europe 87 3.3. Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) 89 3.3.1. Background developments 89 3.3.2. Goals and work methods of the ODIHR 90 3.3.3. Structure of the ODIHR. The Office’s soft diplomacy 92 3.3.4. Budget and funding of the ODIHR 94 3.3.5. Activities in Central and Eastern Europe 95 3.4. European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC) 97 3.4.1. Background developments of the establishment of the EUMC 97 3.4.2. Structure and work methods of the EUMC 99 3.4.3. Budget and funding of the EUMC 102 3.4.4. Activities in Central and Eastern Europe 103 3.5. Conclusion 106 4. In Search of the Millennium: Comparative Analysis of Roma Treatment in Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania before Transition to Democracy (1100-1989) 108 4.1. Introduction 108 4.2. Pre-modern developments in Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania 109 4.2.1. Ottoman Empire 109 4.2.1.1. Bulgaria 109 4.2.1.2. Romania 113 4.2.2. The Habsburg Empire: Hungary 116 4.3 The Roma of independent states in the 20th century 117 4.3.1. The Roma of Bulgaria 117 4.3.2. The Roma of Romania 121 4.3.3. The Roma of Hungary 123 4.4. Communist policies toward the Roma 125 4.5. Conclusion 134 5. Domestic and International Visions of Minority Protection: Healthy Nexus or Uneasy Compromise? (1998-2008) 137 vi 5.1. Introduction 137 5.2. Minorities vs. states 138 5.2.1. Minorities in numbers 138 5.2.1.1. Bulgaria 138 5.2.1.2. Romania 141 5.2.1.3. Hungary 144 5.2.1.4. Concluding remarks 146 5.2.2. The argument of the state 147 5.3. Legal guarantees of minority rights and state programs for Roma integration 150 5.3.1. Bulgaria 150 5.3.1.1. Legal framework within the human rights system 150 5.3.1.2. Government measures for Roma integration 157 5.3.2. Romania 162 5.3.2.1. Legal framework within the human rights system 162 5.3.2.2. Government measures for Roma integration 166 5.3.3. Hungary 173 5.3.3.1. Legal framework within the human rights system 173 5.3.3.2. Government measures for Roma integration 177 5.4. Conclusion 185 Conclusion 191 Bibliography 198 vii Statement of Copyright The copyright of this thesis rests with the author.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Migration Crisis: a Time for Solidarity Lessons?
    The Migration Crisis: A Time for Solidarity Lessons? MA Thesis in European Studies: European Policy Graduate School of Humanities University of Amsterdam Author: Kristina Dimitrova Student number: 11104120 Main supervisor: dhr. mr. dr. A.C.van Wageningen Second supervisor: dhr. dr. P. Rodenburg July, 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ....................................................................................................................... 3 Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................... 4 List of tables/figures .................................................................................................... 5 List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................... 6 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 7 1.1. Background and Current State of Affairs ........................................................... 7 1.2. Purpose and Research Question ...................................................................... 11 1.3. Outline ............................................................................................................ 13 2. Theoretical analysis and methodological approach ................................................ 15 2.1. Defining solidarity ........................................................................................... 15 2.2 Theories on EU solidarity ................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Muslim-Turkish Minority in Bulgaria
    BULGARIAN HELSINKI COMMITTEE MEMBER OF THE INTERNATIONAL HELSINKI FEDERATION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS The Human Rights of Muslims in Bulgaria in Law and Politics since 1878 Sofia November 2003 Contents: Brief Introductory Chapter: 1. Demographic data 2. Origins of the Bulgarian Muslims 2.1. Turks 2.2. Bulgarian-speaking Muslims (Pomaks) 2.3. Roma Muslims Chapter I: The Muslim community in post-Ottoman Bulgaria (1878 - 1944) 1.1. Religious rights 1.2. Immigration and assimilation problems 1.3. Muslim minority education 1.4. Muslim (Turkish) minority press 1.5. The impact of Kemalism on the rights of the Muslims in Bulgaria Chapter II: The Muslim community during the Communist era (1944 - 1989) and the first years of democracy in Bulgaria 2.1. The politics towards Muslims in the period 1944-1956 2.1.1. Legal basis of Muslims’ religious freedoms 2.1.2. Development of Muslim minority education 2.1.3. Immigration inclinations among Muslims and their consequences 2.2. The treatment of Muslims between 1956 and 1984 2.2.1. Limiting the religious freedoms and launching a policy of forced assimilation of Muslims 2.2.2. Renewed immigration waves 2.2.3. New forced assimilation of Pomak Muslims 2.2.4. Preparing the soil for the assimilation of the Turks and the Roma Muslims 2.3. The situation of the Bulgarian Muslims during the last years of the Communist regime (1984-1989) 2.3.1. The “Revival Process” in its apogee 2.3.2. The international reaction to the “Revival Process” 2.3.3. The “Big Excursion” phenomenon Chapter III: Protection of Muslims’ basic rights and freedoms in present day Bulgaria 3.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Thesis
    This electronic thesis or dissertation has been downloaded from the King’s Research Portal at https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/ Geographies of transition heritage, identity and tourism in post-socialist Bulgaria Naumov, Nikola Sotirov Awarding institution: King's College London The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without proper acknowledgement. END USER LICENCE AGREEMENT Unless another licence is stated on the immediately following page this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ You are free to copy, distribute and transmit the work Under the following conditions: Attribution: You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). Non Commercial: You may not use this work for commercial purposes. No Derivative Works - You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work. Any of these conditions can be waived if you receive permission from the author. Your fair dealings and other rights are in no way affected by the above. Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 06. Oct. 2021 GEOGRAPHIES OF TRANSITION: HERITAGE, IDENTITY AND TOURISM IN POST-SOCIALIST BULGARIA A THESIS SUBMITTED BY Nikola Sotirov Naumov BSc MBA MSc IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 21 MAY 2018 KING’S COLLEGE LONDON Abstract In 1989 the fall of the Soviet Union brought new economic, socio-cultural and political realities to many Eastern European states, which were faced with a long and difficult period of transition.
    [Show full text]
  • Europeanization of Minority Rights in Bulgaria: Turks of Bulgaria As a Case Study
    EUROPEANIZATION OF MINORITY RIGHTS IN BULGARIA: TURKS OF BULGARIA AS A CASE STUDY A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES OF MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY MUZAFFER VATANSEVER KUTLAY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS July 2013 Approval of the Graduate School of Social Sciences Prof. Dr. Meliha Altunışık Director I certify that this thesis satisfies all the requirements as a thesis for the degree of Master of Science. Prof. Dr. Hüseyin Bağcı Head of Department This is to certify that we have read this thesis and that in our opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a thesis for the degree of Master of Science. Assoc. Prof. Dr. M. Fatih Tayfur Supervisor Examining Committee Members Assoc. Prof. Dr. M. Fatih Tayfur (METU, IR) Prof. Dr. İlhan Uzgel (Ankara University, IR) Assist. Prof. Dr. Ş. İnan Rüma (İstanbul Bilgi University, IR) PLAGIARISM I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work. Name, Last name: Muzaffer, Vatansever Kutlay Signature: iii ABSTRACT EUROPEANIZATION OF MINORITY RIGHTS IN BULGARIA: TURKS OF BULGARIA AS A CASE STUDY Vatansever Kutlay, Muzaffer M.Sc., Program in International Relations Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. M. Fatih Tayfur July 2013, 126 pages This thesis aims to find an answer to the following question: What are the shifts and continuities of Bulgaria’s minority policy over the last two decades and what is the impact of the EU, thereby Europeanization, in the process, if any? To answer to this question, three sub-periods (1989-1999, 1999-2007 and 2007-2012) are to be investigated separately to reveal the role of the EU in the process.
    [Show full text]
  • Viktor Milanov Direct Democracy in Bulgaria
    Pázmány Law Working Papers 2016/1 Viktor Milanov Direct Democracy in Bulgaria Pázmány Péter Katolikus Egyetem Pázmány Péter Catholic University Budapest http://www.plwp.jak.ppke.hu/ DIRECT DEMOCRACY IN BULGARIA* ** VIKTOR MILANOV 1. Historic antecedents 1.1.The referendum of 1922. Prior to the fall of the communist regime in Bulgaria referendums were held only three times in the history of the Balkan country. Almost five years after the end of World War I the government led by Aleksandar Stamboliyski legislated a new Criminal Law with retroactive effect which allowed the conviction of members of former governments involved in the Balkan Wars and the World War as well. Stamboliyski sought a way to discredit members of the Geshov-, Danev-, Malinov- and Kosturkov-governments who by that time were his main political rivals.1 In order to gain broader social acceptance to execute these controversial political trials, the Bulgarian government held a nationwide referendum on 19th of November 1922 with the question whether or not to convict those who were responsible for the national catastrophes. The Bulgarian Agrarian National Union based government led a successful campaign among the voters and results of the referendum were more than satisfying for the Stamboliyski cabinet, more than 74 % of the voters cast their votes for the conviction of the former ministers. The total number of the voters was 926 000; 647 000 voted for, while 224 000 voted against the conviction. 55 000 ballots were invalid.2 The referendum was based on the “Law on Referendum of the Liability of the Ministers of the Geshov-, Danev-, Malinov- and Kosturkov-governments for the wars they led and the national catastrophes which occurred afterwards” adopted by the XIX.
    [Show full text]
  • Constitutional and Normative Regulation of Property Rights in Bulgaria at the Transition from Planned to Liberal Economy (1989 – 2019)
    Ivan Ruschev CONSTITUTIONAL AND NORMATIVE REGULATION OF PROPERTY RIGHTS IN BULGARIA AT THE TRANSITION FROM PLANNED TO LIBERAL ECONOMY (1989 – 2019) Abstract…….……………….………………….…….1 IV. The right of property under the 1971 I. Introduction ……………………….………..……1 ‘Zhivkov’s“ Constitution ………...……………...5 II. The right of property under the „Turnovo“ V. The right of property under the Constitution Constitution (1879) …..................................…2 of Republic of Bulgaria (1991)…………….…...5 III. The right of property under the ‘Dimitrov’s’ VI. Conclusion……………………………………8 Constitution of the People's Republic of Bulgaria (1947)………..………………………….…………...3 Abstract: The regulation of property at constitutional level can be seen as one of the most significant consequences of the evolution of constitutional rights in the twentieth century, at least because property is a true expression of civilizational development. It is indeed what allows the regulation of property rights under the Bulgarian Constitutions of 1879, 1947, 1971 and 1991 to be seen not only as a legal expression of the spirit of the individual historical epoch, but also as a way to realize the dominant ideology and economic organization of society. In that sense, the review of the various constitutional concepts of property, from socialist property, nationwide property to private property and the separation of private and public property regimes, is rather an attempt to present not the legal form of the same, but rather the socio-economic situation, expressed by this legal form. Key words: Constitution, private and public property, nationwide property, state and municipal property I. INTRODUCTION The emergence of property regulation at a constitutional level can be seen as one of the most significant consequences of the evolution of constitutional rights in the twentieth century.
    [Show full text]
  • Form of Government: Historical Development and Evolution
    Form of Government: Historical Development and Evolution The ideas about Constitution and Parliament, for voting and representation arise even before the restoration of the independent Bulgarian state in 1878 under the influence of the European thoughts and political practices. In 1879 in the former capital of the Second Bulgarian state – Veliko Tarnovo is the start of the parliamentary practice of the liberated Bulgaria. The people’s representatives elaborate the Tarnovo Constitution and signed it down with one consent on April 16, 1878. It is created later than the constitutions of Greece, Serbia and Romania. The History has defined it to rule the country in the next about 70 years. According to the regulations of the Tarnovo Constitution the Bulgarian state is a parliamentary monarchy with a moderate liberal system. The supreme power in the state is divided between the ruler and the National Assembly. The Bulgarian monarch is the Head of the sate who approves the voted by the National Assembly laws. He is also the supreme commander of the armed forces. Under his name and under his supervising act the executive bodies. The Head of the state has important power also concerning the judiciary power – he could reprieve and announce amnesty. According to Tarnovo Constitution the National Assembly could be of two kinds – Regular and Great National Assembly. Basic Supreme body of the legislative power is the Regular National Assembly (NA) that elaborates and passes the laws, adopts the state budget, controls the executive power, etc. Constituent power possesses only the Great National Assembly (GNA) that has the power to change the territory of the country, to change the Constitution and to choose the monarch and regents.
    [Show full text]
  • Marushiakova, Elena and Vesselin Popov. 2004. Muslim Minorities in Bulgaria
    Marushiakova, Elena and Vesselin Popov. 2004. Muslim Minorities in Bulgaria. In: Blaschke, Jochen, ed. Migration and Political Intervention: Diasporas in Transition Countries. Berlin: Parabolis. Historical background Historians usually associate the entry of Islam in the territory of Bulgaria and the subsequent emergence of Turkish and other Muslim minorities, with the conquest of Bulgaria by the Ottoman Empire in the 14th century when the country was included in the boundaries of the Empire. There is no doubt, however, that the much-disputed roots of the ethnic and religious mosaic of present day Bulgaria are older than that. We have to emphasize the fact that, in the Balkans, history is not so much a science as a constructive element in the process of nation formation and an essential structure of national consciousness. The various scientific theses are often embedded into specific national doctrines and we should not be surprised at the radical discrepancies in every historical explanation of the same events or processes. The different periods in Bulgarian historical science are dominated by two extremely contradictory theses about the Ottoman invasion and the origin of the Turkish population in Bulgaria (Zheliazkova 1997: 14). The contradictory policies of the Bulgarian state in respect of the Turkish and the other Muslim minorities in the different historical periods were based on these major theses. According to the first thesis, the cruel genocide of Bulgarians after the Ottoman invasion was followed by intensive colonization of the population in Anatolia (Asia Minor). This population was linked to the Ottoman military invasion and was an important element in the colonization policy of the invaders.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bulgarian 1989
    The Bulgarian 1989 DETELINA DINEVA Institute for Historical Studies, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences The Bulgarian 1989 INTRODUCTION Two dates in Bulgarian 20th-century history are imbued with a special meaning for the country’s citizens – 9 September 1944 and 10 November 1989. In the public mind, these dates have been made to symbolise Change with a capital letter. While 9 September stands as a symbol of Bulgaria’s post-WWII embarking on the road to communism, 10 November is regarded as the watershed marking the start of another system change, this time to capitalism. Interestingly enough, coups were carried out on both dates – a coup d’état on 9 September1 and an intra-party coup on 10 November. With the passage of time, 10 November and 1989 have become rather interchange- able in their symbolic meaning, with both of them standing for the nation’s parting with communism. And as symbols tend to do, ‘1989’ has the remarkable capacity of expand- ing in scope and covering not only diverse in character events and processes, but also ones related to a somewhat broader period. TIME FRAME In the case of Bulgaria, the processes that led to the events of 1989 started to devel- op in the middle of the 1980s. This is not to say that prior to that there had been lack of 2 activities and expressions of dissent in the country. As early as 1945–1955, the Goryani 1 As a result of the coup, the legal government was replaced with a Fatherland Front coalition government consisting of representatives of the Bulgarian Workers’ Party (Communists), the Bulgarian Agrarian National Union “Pladne”, the Bulgarian Workers’ Social Democratic Party (Broad Socialists), and the “Zveno” political circle.
    [Show full text]
  • Sbornik-T-II 2015 K IT
    THE UNIVERSITY OF SHUMEN THE DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY AND ARCHAEOLOGY STUDIA ACADEMICA ŠUMENENSIA CHRISTIANITY IN SOUTHEASTERN EUROPE (CIVILIZATIONAL AND POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE) edited by Biser Georgiev, Rumen Vatashki and Ivo Topalilov Vol. 2, 2015 The University of Shumen Press STUDIA ACADEMICA ŠUMENENSIA THE UNIVERSITY OF SHUMEN THE DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY AND ARCHAEOLOGY edited by Biser Georgiev, Rumen Vatashki, Ivo Topalilov and Svetlana Nedelcheva (language editor) ISSN 2367-5446 THE UNIVERSITY OF SHUMEN Contents ‘Christianity in Southeastern Europe (Civilizational and Political Perspective’ …………………………………………………………………………………………….… 5 Bisser Georgiev , Rumen Vatashki, Ivo Topalilov Rereading ‘Stroitelite ...’ …….…………………………………………………………………..... 8 Andrei Pantev Russia and the Coburgs between Catholicism and East Orthodox Christianity …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 27 Dimitar Sazdov The religious factor in the Austrian-Hungarian policy towards Bulgaria throughout the wars of 1912-1918 …………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………….. 47 Radoslav Mishev Attempt to create a Christian Democratic Party in Bulgaria at the end of World War I ……………………………………………………………………………………….…… 57 Bisser Georgiev The Bulgarian Ortkodox Exarchate and Abolitionism ……………………….…… 73 Valery Kolev Birth of parliamentary democracy (1871 church and laity council) ………… 89 Hristo Temelsky Church and care for orphan children on Ukrainian territories in the 19 th – the beginning of 20 th centuries ……………………………..………………………………… 111 Olena Kravchenko ‘I gave my vision for their country!
    [Show full text]
  • Direct Democracy in the EU
    Direct Democracy in the EU The Myth of a Citizens’ Union Edited by Steven Blockmans Sophia Russack Contributors Steven Blockmans Pol Morillas Wojciech Bialozyt Beth Oppenheim Vladimír Bilčík Eleonora Poli Erik Brandes Antoinette Primatarova Christoph Breinschmid Sophia Russack Karlis Bukovskis Héctor Sánchez Margalef Filippa Chatzistavrou Stefan Schaller Aleksander Fuksiewicz Felix Schenuit Rasmuss Filips Geks Paul Schmidt Agata Gostyńska-Jakubowska Mihai Sebe Dídac Gutiérrez-Peris Daniel Smilov Tuomas Iso-Markku Catharina Sørensen Juha Jokela Zdeněk Sychra Jan Kovář Eliza Vaș Petr Kratochvíl Nikoleta Vasileva Jacek Kucharczyk Elizabete Vizgunova Arkadiusz Legieć Nicolai von Ondarza Javier Lorente Richard Youngs Borislav Mavrov CEPS, Brussels Rowman & Littlefield International, London CEPS (Centre for European Policy Studies) is an independent and non-partisan think tank based in Brussels. Its mission is to produce sound policy research leading to constructive solutions to the challenges facing Europe. The European Policy Institutes Network (EPIN) comprises 38 renowned think tanks and policy institutes from 25 European countries. EPIN aims to contribute to the debate on the future of Europe through expert analysis of the different national and EU- level debates. EPIN is coordinated by CEPS. Steven Blockmans is Senior Research Fellow and Head of the Institutions unit at CEPS and Professor of EU External Relations Law and Governance at the University of Amsterdam Sophia Russack is Researcher at CEPS Institutions Unit and a PhD candidate at Maastricht University. The editors of this book convened a meeting for the contributing authors of the European Policy Institutes Network (EPIN) that was held at the Delegation of the European Parliament in Athens in June 2018.
    [Show full text]
  • Proquest Dissertations
    INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis arxf dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while otfiers may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, ookxed or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleodthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the autftor did rx>t send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unautfxxized copyright material had to be removed, a note will irKficate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9” black and white photographic prints are availat)le for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. Bell & Howell Information and Learning 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Artwr, Ml 48106-1346 USA 800-521-0600 UMT PROBLEMS OF DEMOCRATIC TRANSITION AND CONSOLIDATION IN POST-COMMUNIST BULGARIA DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By Rossen V. Vassilev, M.A. The Ohio State University 2000 Dissertation Committee: Professor Richard Gunther, Adviser Approved by Professor Anthony Mughan Professor Goldie Shabad Adviser Department of Political Science UMI Number 9971652 UMI UMI Microform9971652 Copyright 2000 by Bell & Howell Information and Leaming Company.
    [Show full text]