Presented at the Conference: Central Europe on Its Own Path
October 24-26, 2025, in Prague, Czechia
By Viktor Kostov, Ph.D.

Introduction

As the world becomes increasingly polarized and global governance structures show signs of ideological and institutional fatigue, regions with shared historical, cultural, and spiritual legacies are rethinking their place within the international order. Central Europe, including South-Eastern Europe, both long defined by complex political heritage and strong cultural identities, stand today at a crossroads.

There is a growing awareness among intellectuals, policymakers, and citizens alike that the time may be ripe for a renewed form of political unity—one that respects national sovereignty while enabling greater cooperation. In this presentation, I will argue that the most viable and sustainable path for such unity is a confederacy, not a federation or supranational government. Furthermore, the foundation of this confederacy must rest on a firm ideological platform rooted in classical human rights, derived from Christian values and traditions.

This is not merely a call for regional integration, but a vision for a principled and pragmatic political project—one that reconciles freedom and order, identity and cooperation, sovereignty and solidarity.

Why a Confederacy?

1. Pragmatic Formation and Structure

A confederacy offers a realistic, low-cost, and relatively swift path to institutional cooperation. Unlike a federation, which requires a deep and often irreversible pooling of sovereignty, a confederacy allows member states to retain their independence while creating joint governance mechanisms to pursue common goals.

Another model, already proposed by Mr. Zdeněk Koudelka, is a confederation with a shared head of state — and why not a king?[1] The argument is that legitimate authority derives from God, rather than emerging from within politically driven individuals or parties. As a result, the risks of corruption associated with elections could be reduced. The ruling dynasty could be selected from among the heirs of former royal families.

However, this historically tried and tested model is not without its drawbacks — at least at this stage of the discussion. First, inherited power does not necessarily prevent corruption; in some cases, it may even enable it. Second, the role of the Christian faith in the state has been significantly weakened, particularly after decades of communist rule and the subsequent rise of consumerism. Third, monarchies — or monarchic models — are often viewed with skepticism in today’s predominantly pro-republican climate. This is not a critique of the proposed model, but rather an acknowledgment of potential challenges it may face.

Read more: A Central European Confederacy and the Role of Classical Human Rights

• Slovakia
• Constitutional Amendments
• Marriage
• Sovereignty

The Slovak and EU flags

October 29, 2025

In September 2025, the Parliament of Slovakia adopted a constitutional amendment presented as a protection of “traditional values” and national identity.[1] It was passed with the minimum required majority — exactly 90 votes out of 150 deputies.

Main Changes

The amendment introduced several key modifications to the Constitution:

• Principle of Legality (Art. 2(2)) was expanded: state authorities must act not only according to law but also within the Constitution, in accordance with its principles and values.

• Protection of National Identity and Sovereignty (Art. 7): new provisions were added declaring that Slovakia retains its sovereignty “particularly in matters of national identity and fundamental cultural and ethical issues.” It is expressly stated that the Constitution cannot be interpreted as consent to transfer these powers to external bodies.

• Hierarchy Clause (Art. 7(5)): international human rights treaties take precedence over ordinary laws, but not over the Constitution itself.

• New Article 52a: the Constitution now recognizes only two biologically determined sexes — male and female.

• Adoption Rules (Art. 41(5)): adoption is allowed only by married spouses (a man and a woman) or in specific exceptional cases; single adoption is possible only exceptionally and if in the best interests of the child.

• Education: parents have the right to decide whether their child participates in activities outside the official state curriculum; educational content must comply with constitutional values.

• Social Rights: guarantees equality of pay for equal work between men and women (Art. 36).

Context and Consequences

The amendment is part of a broader trend in Central and Eastern Europe where countries have been embedding topics such as family, national identity, and traditional values into their constitutions. Many of these ideas already existed in Slovak legislation and constitutional case law but are now formally enshrined in the Constitution.

The main criticisms are that terms such as “national identity” and “ethical issues” are vague and may create contradictions with Slovakia’s international obligations. The new clause stating that international treaties do not apply if they conflict with the Constitution raises the risk that the country may refuse to implement decisions of international courts or conventions.

At the same time, what may seem unclear to “social engineers” is perfectly clear to Slovaks: national identity means belonging to the language, culture, religion, traditions, history, and values of the Slovak nation. Ethical issues are those related to the application of precisely these historical, traditional, and Christian values typical of Europe — and of Slovakia itself.

This much-criticized new clause, in practice, resolves a controversial issue that has also arisen before the Bulgarian courts and legislature regarding the well-known legal question of gender and the Constitution. The Bulgarian supreme courts still seem to lack clarity as to whether international treaties ratified by the National Assembly — which under Article 5 of the Bulgarian Constitution take precedence over domestic legislation — also apply when they conflict with the Constitution itself.

In Bulgaria’s context of jurisprudential uncertainty, one possible interpretation is that the Constitution would effectively derogate its own authority if ratified international treaties were considered superior not only to national laws but also to the Constitution. Thus, the alleged “risk” of not applying decisions of international courts and conventions is actually a form of protection of Slovak sovereignty, if one accepts that the supremacy of the Slovak Constitution over international norms is an expression of that sovereignty.

The amendment followed the formal legislative procedure: drafted in January 2025, passed through three parliamentary readings (April, June, and September), and finally adopted on September 25, 2025, with 90 votes in favor. The Venice Commission was invited to give an urgent opinion but could only suggest linguistic corrections at that late stage.

Significance of This Development

The amendment represents a constitutional turn: Slovakia now emphasizes that state governance should be based not only on legal norms but also on a set of values — national, cultural, and traditional.

This may increase tensions between Slovakia and its international obligations (EU law and international human rights treaties), since the Constitution now stands above them. Yet, according to the article, this tension was not created by Slovakia itself but is rather a reaction to pressure from Brussels, which, in the name of EU law, seeks to override not only national legislation but also local culture, faith, and values. The tension, it argues, was not generated by Bratislava, but by Brussels. Slovakia is merely defending its right to independence from excessive control and directives imposed by the EU’s central institutions.

Domestically, the amendment constitutionally affirms a binary, heteronormative family model, which will influence adoption, education, and civil rights. According to the text, while this influence is seen as alarming by some, it is actually described as a defense of children’s and parents’ rights not to be exposed to grotesque, perverse, anti-family, and anti-child propaganda in recent years — a propaganda that, under the guise of “sexual education,” allegedly aimed to rob even the youngest of their innocence by promoting pornography, debauchery, and sexual deviance.

From the perspective of comparative constitutional law, Slovakia becomes an example of how a state can use constitutional amendment to respond to liberal social changes by emphasizing “tradition” and “identity.”

In essence, Slovakia adopted these constitutional amendments to defend its sovereignty as well as classical human rights against the influx of degenerative initiatives coming from the European Union.

Notes:
[1] Garova, L. Slovakia’s 2025 Constitutional Amendment – Traditional Values and National Identity in the Constitution. Central European Association for Comparative Law. https://www.ceaclaw.org/post/slovakia-2025-constitutional-amendment

Ernst Roets' speech at the international conservatism summit Bratislava, 11 November 2024

“If you want to know what the future of Western Europe will look like, look at what is happening in South Africa.” This was the introductory remarks to a recent series of articles in the popular Hungarian newspaper Demokrata. The series was about the deterioration of South Africa and the initiatives of the Afrikaner people to ensure a future for ourselves through the variety of institutions that form part of the Solidarity Movement. Demokrata’s conclusion was not a lone voice in the wilderness. The notion that South Africa ought to be looked at to get a glimpse of the future is becoming a widely held opinion in mainstream conservative circles in Europe and America.

In our international efforts, we have noticed that it is not necessary to tell people that South Africa should be considered to be ahead of the curve. It is, however, necessary to explain that South Africa ought not only to be looked in order to get a glimpse of what the future might hold as far as crises are concerned, but also solutions. 

But let me take a step back…

When the Berlin Wall fell, it was generally interpreted to signal the collapse of communism and the advent of liberal democracy. Even though South Africa was internationally celebrated as an example of the triumph of liberal democracy, it was, in truth, an example of the advent of communism. 

Read more: “Safely through the crowd:”Building resilient institutions in hostile circumstances