Hungary, 2012

The rule of law is among the

topics before the sixty-seventh session of the General

Assembly. This is an especially important issue,

especially for someone who has had the opportunity to

personally experience the lack of it. For many decades,

Hungary belonged to the Communist-Socialist bloc.

By 1949 the Communist takeover of power had been

completed, just four years after the end of the Second

World War. The multiparty system had been eliminated.

The majority of leaders of political parties established

after the war were forced into exile or were imprisoned.

I was born 10 years later. I spent my early adult years,

and thus the years of my political awakening as well,

in a dictatorship. In fact, my two older children were

born under that political system. For our generation,

just as for that of our parents, our everyday experience

was of being deprived of human rights and liberties.

Independence? From what, when Soviet troops kept

Hungary under occupation? Free elections? How, when

political parties were non-existent and, even at late as

1988, it was a crime against the State to form political

organizations.

Constitutional freedoms, such as the freedom of

speech, the right of assembly and the right to practice

religion freely, existed only on paper or not even on

that. The end of the 1980s and the fall of the Berlin Wall

and of the Iron Curtain, brought democratic changes to

Hungary as well. It was in the spring of 1990, more than

40 years later, that we could organize free elections

again. Preparations for the peaceful transition, and

then the post-election years, can be deemed to be a

successful period from the perspective of the rule of

law.

Hungary, however, did not have a new, consolidated

Constitution that was not unlike the 1949 Constitution,

easily revealed through the number in its title. It was

that shortfall that the Hungarian National Assembly

rectified in April 2011, when it decided to adopt the new

fundamental law of Hungary. What is now the youngest

Constitution of Europe incorporates almost all elements

of the European Convention on Human Rights, along

with the rule-of-law institutions safeguarding the

checks and balances established in 1990. As a new

element, constitutional constraints compliant with the

rule of law have been imposed to curb irresponsible

public spending and the reckless increase of State

indebtedness.

The new Constitution of Hungary provides

guarantees for the fulfilment of international legal

obligations and for compliance and adherence to the

generally accepted rules of international law. It is

important to point out that numerous new provisions,

which concern the new, so-called fourth generation of

basic rights, have been included in the new fundamental

law.

Article P of the Constitution stipulates that:

“All natural resources, especially agricultural

land, forests and drinking water supplies,

biodiversity — in particular native plant and animal

species — and cultural assets shall form part of

the nation’s common heritage, and the State and

every person shall be obliged to protect, sustain and

preserve them for future generations”.

Whereas Article XXI sets forth that:

“Hungary shall recognise and enforce the right

of every person to a healthy environment. A person

who causes any damage to the environment shall be

obliged to restore it or to bear all costs of restoration

as defined by law.

“No pollutant waste shall be brought into

Hungary for the purpose of dumping”.

Environmental protection, the preservation of

natural values, the protection of soil, air and water

quality — how much time have we spent talking about

them recently? Due to the limited time alloted, permit

me to highlight only a single issue from the larger set

of problems before us, namely, the issue of water and

sanitation. It is even more important to mention it here

because, as a result of our common decision, nex year

has been designated as the International Year of Water

Cooperation.

We can truly appreciate the adequate quantity

and quality of water if we experience what it means

to be deprived of it, whatever the reason — pollution,

overconsumption or environmental, changes. During

recent years, a great variety of studies have been

published about our irresponsible behaviour, about

the short-sighted, and may I say, foolish, attitude with

which we are polluting our waters. Allow me to cite

just a few findings from these documents. Ninety per

cent of all communal wastewater and 70 per cent of

industrial wastewater in countries of the developing

world is discharged into rivers without any treatment

whatsoever. The chemical revolution of the era following the Second World War also has had seriously adverse

implications on the environment. Industry nowadays

has been using about 12,000 different types of toxic

chemicals, while a single drop of crude oil can render

25 litres of drinking water non-potable. Manufacturing

a single vehicle requires 148,000 1itres of industrial

water. The toilet culture of nearly 2 billion people is

still not adequate today.

What are the consequences? Polluted and toxic

lakes, lifeless streams of water reminiscent of rivers

only by their names. Instead, they are stinking

industrial canals. The consequences are that there is

not enough water around to meet the everyday needs of

human consumption. Today, more than 1 billion people

do not have access to clean, potable water. Another

consequence, according to a 2009 UNICEF study, is

that serious diseases, spread by polluted water and the

lack sanitation, have been killing young children at a

pace equivalent to that of a Boeing 747 airplane packed

with young children crashing every four hours.

I could continue to list dramatic examples and

serious consequences of the lack of sanitation, but let

us ask ourselves the question: if everything were all

right with wastewater management, would it mean that

everything was also all right with respect to our water

management, water treatment and protection of our

water basins? Unfortunately, the answer is no.

Water management today requires international

cooperation. It is indispensable. Half of the Earth’s

population lives in so-called shared, or joint, water

catchment areas. The same river provides the water

supplies for two, three or more countries. Cooperation

between such countries is a daily obligation. Absence

of such cooperation could lead to supply, social, health

or even war-related tensions. Nearly 1.5 billion people

live in river basins, where water usage is larger than the

minimum extent of water replenishment, which leads to

the exhaustion of water reserves.

At least two thirds of European cities with a

population of 100,000 or more people are using their

water resources faster than they can be replenished. It

is true that the standards are set high in agriculture,

especially if the agricultural sector wishes to produce

adequate supplies of food for a further 2.5 billion

people by 2050. That is especially true if we consider

that currently it takes about 140 1itres of water to

produce one cupful of coffee or about 15,000 1itres for

1 kilogram of beef.

We have been aware of these figures for years. But

what is knowledge worth if we do not put it to use? Why

do we wait for nature to remind us again and again of

our grave irresponsibility? Hungary assesses the issue

of water and sanitation to be one of the most important

questions of the twenty-first century. During recent

years, we have been active participants in the friends of

water working group, created under the auspices of the

United Nations. I think we will have ample work waiting

for us during the coming years as well. We are ready

and willing to share our knowledge and experience.

We are also looking forward to welcoming everyone

interested to the conference on water and sanitation to

be organized in Budapest next autumn.