The role of a Constitution is to create a framework for social interaction equidistant to all citizens and that allow them to achieve their best potential. in the present context, the Constitution should allow Romanians belonging to cetaÈ › make the most of oportunitaÈ › cultural and economical ile it brings to EU membership. The novelty is that today freedom of Romanian citizens, i.e. their number opÈ can increase options › if the sovereignty of the roman State. Freedom we grow once our area of action is no longer limited to the territory of Romania, but all over Europe. [1] In this sense, besides the classic scenario in which the Romans go to work in Europe, it is possible that organizaÈ 's outside graniÈ › Romania to act without any requirement on Romanian territory; Thus, since the Romans cetaÈ › would have access not only to the imported products but [2]also to services, including health, education and culture. Given the advantages, even if "old Europe" refused to adopt the ' Bolkestein directive ' in its original version necompromisa, which would have allowed total freedom of movement not only products, but also services, Romania should adopt unilaterally and to persuade other countries to do the same thing. Romanian citizens have not only won if the offer of services grows. in order to demonstrate the revolutionary nature of the proposal, we will apply the basic concept of the Bolkestein directive in an unorthodox manner: the issue of discrimination of ethnic minorities.
Thanks to the Internet, means of transport and the current disappearance of borders within the EU, dependent on cultural minorities of the State in which it is found has decreased considerably. Now, they can maintain close relationships with communities outside the country. The laws of the States, in particular the Romanian Constitution, have not adapted to this new reality, reflecting the cultural vision of the minorities you from the responsibility of host States. Also be considered totally States ' sovereign ', in the sense that other countries had no right to be involved in actions in their territory.
Currently, in the EU, it is possible that members of minorities have equal rights with other citizens absolutely. Till now this wasn't really possible because minorities and most of them were involved in a zero-sum game. Although this is no longer true, many politicians and the public at large are not yet aware of it. The Romanian State no longer has to keep at all costs to organize Hungarian-language schools, but must allow the Hungarian State to organize schools in Romania, and citizens can choose the direction that their contribution goes to education. Among the options can be the Romanian State, other States, or private firms accredited by the education (schools, colleges, universities). Thus, if the Hungarian State (or any other State) be seen as coming from Romania, in a certain area, large sums of money for education will know that there is a demand for education in Hungarian. Also, if a non-governmental organization that supports the rights of Roma, gets money (which may come either from the Roma community members either from other Romanian citizens), then she will be able to organize within the Romani communities education. The idea is simple: the Romanian State is not the most competent to organise education in languages other than English, which is why you need to allow other countries and private organizations to operate these systems. This will enhance the freedom of members of minorities, without in any way restrict the others. In addition, once the roman State take such a measure, he will be able to ask the same thing of the States in the territory of which there are significant minorities, e.g. Greece, Spain, Italy or even the Republic of Moldova. Ideally, the Romanian State to organize himself for schools these people (with the money come even from them of course).
The concept of a minority must be seen as a natural consequence of the right of Association. at present, however, minorities are creations of the State-law declare that minorities are minorities and makes a series of absurd differences between traditional minorities (e.g. the Hungarians) and non-traditional (e.g. Italians, Chinese, etc.), giving them privileged rights legitimand discrimination against the first and the last. The State would not have to deal with ionari of populaÈ partiÈ › › take along ethnic or otherwise.
The concept of decentralization assert that it is more subtle because it does not have a territorial base. If, for example, would become autonomous Seklerland discrimination would reverse from Hungarian to Romanian, i.e. would not solve anything. The problem is not discrimination but also discrimination against foreigners in general. The solution is that two (or more) systems of rules to work in parallel on the same territory, or in other words as Hungarian State may provide services on Romanian territory (and vice versa). Thus, the Romanian language schools in the area will be managed by the Romanian State, and the Hungarian Magyar State. It is not necessary that a single set of rules to be applied in a given territory; a portion of the land does not belong to a State or a particular ethnicity, but also private persons who reside there. This idea of coexistence of two or more sets of rules on the same territory will no longer seemed so strange if we think that it is already applied in the case of religion: on the same territory for example both coexist and Orthodox Catholics; Catholic churches from Romania without being organized by the Orthodox Church. Why would then the Hungarian schools organised by the Ministry of culture, roman or Roman-language schools abroad organised by other States and by the roman?
References:
1. Frits Bolkestein, The Internal Market: Ten Years Without Frontiers Press Conference Brussels, 07 January 2003
2. BBC Q&A: Services Directive, 15 November 2006