Unorthodoxy in legislation: The Hungarian experience

Deák, Dániel (2014) Unorthodoxy in legislation: The Hungarian experience. Society and Economy, 36 (2). pp. 151-184. DOI 10.1556/SocEc.36.2014.2.2

PDF - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader

Official URL:


This paper deals with legal unorthodoxy. The main idea is to study the so-called unorthodox taxes Hungary has adopted in recent years. The study of unorthodox taxes will be preceded by a more general discussion of how law is made under unorthodoxy, and what are the special features of unorthodox legal policy. Unorthodoxy challenges equality before the law and is critical towards mass democracies. It also raises doubts on the operability of the rule of law, relying on personal skills, or loyalty, rather than on impersonal mechanisms arising from checks and balances as developed by the division of political power. Besides, for lack of legal suppositions, legislation suffers from casuistry and regulatory capture.

Item Type:Article
Uncontrolled Keywords:unorthodox economic and legal policies, populism, special industry levies, quality of legislation, rule of law, legal certainty, substantive and procedural justice, review of constitutional provisions
JEL classification:K20 - Regulation and Business Law: General
Divisions:Faculty of Business Administration > Institute of Finance and Accounting > Department of Business Law

Bourdieu, P. (1989): Social space and symbolic power. In: McQuarie, D. (ed.): Readings in
contemporary sociological theory: from modernity to post-modernity. Englewood Cliffs:
Prentice Hall.
Bouckaert, L. (2007): Spirituality in economics. In: Bouckaert, L. – Zsolnai, L. (eds.): Spirituality
as a public good. Antwerpen & Apeldoorn: Garant.
Braithwaite, J. (2002): Rules and Principles: A Theory of Legal Certainty. Australian Journal of
Legal Philosophy 27: 47-82.
Bruni, L. – Zamagni, S. (2007): Civil economy; Efficiency, equity, public happiness. Bern: Peter
Carothers, T. (1998): The rule of law revival. Foreign Affairs 77(2).
Csizmadia, E. (2010): Lehet-e a lomhából fürge? A magyar politikai hagyomány az alkalmazkodás
korában [Can something slow become quick? Hungarian political tradition in the era of
adaptation]. Élet és Irodalom, 23 April.
Dicey, A. V. (1964): Introduction to the study of the law of the Constitution. London: MacMillan.
Dworkin, R. (1986): Law's Empire. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Fehér, M. (2013): Hungary’s PM Orban says sectoral taxes to remain for several years. Wall Street
Journal, 18 July.
Finnis, J. (1980): Natural Law and Natural Rights, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Frank, J. (1930): Law and the modern mind. New York: Brentano’s.
Freud, S. (1921): Massenpsychologie und Ich-Analyse. Wien: Internationaler Psychoanalytischer
Fuller, L. L. (1964): The morality of law. New Haven and London, Yale University Press.
Gribnau, H. (2007): Soft law and taxation: The case of the Netherlands. Legisprudence 1(3): 291-

Gribnau, H. (2013): Equality, Legal Certainty and Tax Legislation in the Netherlands. Fundamental
Legal Principles as Checks on Legislative Power: A Case Study. Utrecht Law Review 9(2): 52-
Habermas, J. (1995): What does a crisis mean today? Legitimation problems in late capitalism. In:
McQuarie, D. (ed.): Readings in contemporary sociological theory: from modernity to post-
modernity. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Halmai, G. – Scheppele, K. L., eds. (2013): Amicus Brief for the Venice Commission on the Fourth
Amendment to the Fundamental Law of Hungary. April.
Happé, R. H. (2007): Multinationals, Enforcement Covenants and Fair Share. Intertax 35(10): 537-
Happé, R. H. – Gribnau, H. (2007): The Netherlands national report: Constitutional limits to
taxation in a democratic state: The Dutch experience. Michigan State Journal of International
Law 15(2).
Harlow, C. (2006): Global administrative law: The quest for principles and values. European
Journal of International Law 17(1): 190-192.
Hart, H. L.A. (1961): The Concept of Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hayek, F. A. von (1960): The Constitution of Liberty. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hayek, F. A. von (1976): Law, legislation and liberty, Vol. 2: The mirage of social justice,
Routledge & Keagan Paul.
Hayek, F. A. von (1974): Lecture to the Memory of Alfred Nobel, 11 December.
Kelsen, H. (1945): General theory of law and state. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
King, M. L. (1963): Letter from Birmingham Jail. The Atlantic 212(2): 78-88.
Kis, J. (2013): Az összetorlódott idő – Második nekirugaszkodás (Congested time – Second
nekirugaszkodas, accessed 18 March 2014.
Kolm, S.-C. (1993): Distributive justice. In: Goodin, R. E. – Pettit, P. (eds): A companion to
contemporary political philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell.
Kopátsy, S. (1995): Van kiút! (There is a way out!). Budapest: Belvárosi Könyvkiadó.
Kopits, G. (2001): Fiscal rules: useful policy framework or unnecessary ornament? IMF Working
Paper WP/01/145.
Laclau, E. (2005): Populism: What’s in a name? In: Panizza, F. (ed.): Populism and the Mirror of
Democracy. London: Verso.
Leibholz, G. (1997): Der Rechtsstaat und die Freiheit des Individuums. In: Meyers
enzyklopädisches Lexikon, Band 19. Mannheim: Bibliographisches Institut.
Long, N. (1968): II. The administrative process. In: Sills, D. L. (ed.): International encyclopaedia of
the social sciences. London: The MacMillan Company & The Free Press
Luhmann, N. (1988): The unity of the legal system. In: Teubner, G. (ed.): Autopoietic law: A new
approach to law and society. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Marx, K. – Engels, F. (1974): Manifest der Kommunistischen Partei (Februar 1848); In: II.
Proletarier und Kommunisten; Karl Marx u. Friedrich Engels, Werke, Bd.4. Berlin: Dietz
Maxeiner, J. R. (2006-2007): “Legal certainty: A European alternative to American legal
indeterminacy?”, Tulane Journal Int'l & Comparative Law, Vol. 15, at p. 541, p. 547.
Mayhew, L. (1968): II. The legal system. In: Sills, D. L. (ed.): International encyclopaedia of the
social sciences. London: The MacMillan Company & The Free Press
Neumann, E. (1949): Tiefenpsychologie und neue Ethik. Zürich: Rascher.
O’Donnell, G. (2004): Why the Rule of Law Matters. Journal of Democracy 15(4): 32-46.
Orbán, V. (2011): Jövőre jön a bejáratás (Running-in to come next year). MTV, 11 December.
Ost, F. (1988): Between order and disorder: The game of law. In: Teubner, G. (ed.): Autopoietic
law: A new approach to law and society. Berlin and New York: W. de Gruyter.
Paunio, E. (2009): Beyond Predictability – Reflections on Legal Certainty and the Discourse
Theory of Law in the EU Legal Order. German Law Journal 10(11): 1469.
Popelier, P. (2000): Legal Certainty and Principles of Proper Law Making. European Journal of
Law Reform 2(3): 321.
Pound, R. (1942): Administrative law; Its growth, procedure and significance. Pittsburgh:
University of Pittsburgh Press.
Radbruch, G. (1946): Gesetzliches Unrecht und übergesetzliches Recht. Süddeutsche
Juristenzeitung 1: 107-108.
Radbruch, G. (1956): Rechtsphilosophie. Stuttgart: Kohler.
Raz, J. (1977): The Rule of Law and Its Virtue. The Law Quarterly Review 93.
Ripp, Z. (2006): A populizmus árnyéka (Under shadow of populism). Mozgó Világ Online,, accessed 20 March 2014.
Rumble, W. E. (1961): Jerome Frank and his critics: Certainty and fantasy in the judicial process.
Journal of Public Law 10: 125-138.
Scalia, A. (1989): The rule of law as a law of rules. The University of Chicago Law Review 56(4):
Schauer, F.(2003): The Convergence of Rules and Standards. New Zealand Law Review 2003: 303-
Stammler, R. (1926): Die Lehre vom richtigen Recht. Halle (Saale): Buchhandlung des
Summers, R. S. (1999): The Principles of the Rule of Law. Notre Dame Law Review 74: 1691-
Tamanaha, B. Z. (2004): On the rule of law; History, politics, theory. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Teubner, G. (1983): Substantive and reflexive elements in modern law. Law and Society 17(2): 257.
Tölgyessy, P. (2013): Irányított nemzeti kapitalizmus. Az Orbán-rendszer természete [Managed
national capitalism. The nature of the Orban-regime], accessed 20
March 2014.
Vörös, I. (2013): Vázlat az alapvető jogok természetéről az Alaptörvény negyedik és ötödik
módosítása után (Az AB döntése, a Velencei Bizottság és az Európai Parlament állásfoglalásai)
[Outlines on the nature of fundamental rights after the Fourth and Fifth Amendment of the
Fundamental Law (Decision of the Constitutional Court, standpoints of the Venice Commission
and the European Parliament)]. Fundamentum 17(3): 53-65.
Weber, M. (1922): Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

ID Code:1601
Deposited By: Ádám Hoffmann
Deposited On:18 Jun 2014 10:50
Last Modified:13 Dec 2021 09:21

Repository Staff Only: item control page


Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics