civic culture in which constitutionalism flourishes. One should not be surprised, therefore, to find constitutions being drafted that have a somewhat abstract quality about them -- constitutions whose real test lies in the future. This is not to say that Central and Eastern European countries have no tradition of constitutionalism. Poles still celebrate that country's period of Eighteenth Century Enlightenment, and they are well aware that Poland's great Constitution of May 3, 1791, was the world's second written constitution (followed soon thereafter by France's first written constitution).5 Hungary has traditions of constitutionalism that go back to the Golden Bull of 1222 -- Hungary's counterpart of England's Magna Carta. Even the repression of the Communist years, during which party leaders sought to mold the local equivalent of the "Soviet man," could not erase traditional ideas of constitutionalism developed during centuries of Hungarian history. Peter Paczolay, chief counsellor to that country's Constitutional Court, has demonstrated how Hungary's transition was in reality a "constitutional revolution." The constitutional change that unfolded beginning in 1989 bore some resemblance to the modes of thought in Hungary in 1848. Modern Hungary has achieved a peaceful transition to a multiparty system in a way that emphasises the place of law in justifying the manner and mode of transition.6 The Influence of Europe and America The drafting of constitutions in countries undergoing transition from Communism to democracy presents fascinating case studies in the relative influence of indigenous experience and external influence. Much of what goes into the new constitutions is home-grown, reflecting a particular country's history, culture, politics, and traditions. Yet many ideas are borrowed, reflecting the comparative aspects of constitutionalism. It should come as no surprise that those who draft constitutions in Central and Eastern Europe look, not only to their own countries' experience, but also to that of other places. The international traffic in thinking about rights and constitutions is of long standing. When Americans in the 1770s and 1780s wrote their first state and federal constitutions, they built, of course, on generations of experience with law-making and institution-building on their own continent. But they also drew heavily upon ideas shaped in the Old World. Indeed, James Madison, the architect of the federal constitutional order, made extensive notes on the "ancient and modern confederacies" before composing the plan that, as introduced at Philadelphia, became the basis for the debates of 1787.7 To which countries and to what constitutions do the new democracies in Central and Eastern Europe look when they write their own constitutions for a democratic age? Professors and other legal experts in the region are well read in both European and American constitutional ideas. One who looks, however, at the constitutions drafted or adopted in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe will find that they are much more like the constitutions of Western Europe than like that of the United States. The form of government adopted in the new democracies is European, not American. It is the parliamentary system so familiar in Europe, not the American model of separation of powers, that is to be found throughout Central and Eastern Europe. Even when a presidential model is under consideration, it is the constitution of France's Fifth Republic, not the American version, to which drafters look as a point of departure. When judicial review is debated, constitutional drafters in Central and Eastern Europe may (but usually do not) mull the idea of a court of unified jurisdiction like the Supreme Court of the United States. Invariably, however, the drafters choose some form of a tribunal having specialised constitutional CSCE ODIHR BULLETIN Vol. 2, No. 1 5