@{MTMT:33809248,
	title = {Gender Equality and Constitutional Interpretation. Hungary.},
	url = {https://m2.mtmt.hu/api/publication/33809248},
	author = {Drinóczi, Timea and Balogh, Lídia},
	booktitle = {The Rights of Women in Comparative Constitutional Law},
	doi = {10.4324/9781003349488-5},
	unique-id = {33809248},
	year = {2023},
	pages = {50-66},
	orcid-numbers = {Drinóczi, Timea/0000-0002-7657-3572}
}

@inbook{MTMT:33299186,
	title = {The rise of Illiberalism},
	url = {https://m2.mtmt.hu/api/publication/33299186},
	author = {Drinóczi, Timea},
	booktitle = {Encyclopedia of the Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy},
	doi = {10.1007/978-94-007-6730-0_1047-2},
	unique-id = {33299186},
	year = {2023},
	pages = {1-5},
	orcid-numbers = {Drinóczi, Timea/0000-0002-7657-3572}
}

@article{MTMT:33573937,
	title = {The missing arc of a backlash?. Thirty years of constitutional debate on ‘women’s equality’ in Hungary},
	url = {https://m2.mtmt.hu/api/publication/33573937},
	author = {Balogh, Lídia and Drinóczi, Timea},
	doi = {10.17356/ieejsp.v8i4.969},
	journal-iso = {INTERSECTIONS (HU)},
	journal = {INTERSECTIONS: EAST EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SOCIETY AND POLITICS},
	volume = {8},
	unique-id = {33573937},
	year = {2022},
	eissn = {2416-089X},
	pages = {112-131},
	orcid-numbers = {Drinóczi, Timea/0000-0002-7657-3572}
}

@inbook{MTMT:33229851,
	title = {Illiberalism},
	url = {https://m2.mtmt.hu/api/publication/33229851},
	author = {Drinóczi, Timea},
	booktitle = {Encyclopedia of the Philosophy of Law and Social Philosophy},
	doi = {10.1007/978-94-007-6730-0_1047-1},
	unique-id = {33229851},
	year = {2022},
	pages = {1-5},
	orcid-numbers = {Drinóczi, Timea/0000-0002-7657-3572}
}

@inbook{MTMT:33209481,
	title = {12. Decision 45/2012. (XII. 29.) AB. Transitory Provisions},
	url = {https://m2.mtmt.hu/api/publication/33209481},
	author = {Drinóczi, Timea},
	booktitle = {The main lines of the jurisprudence of the Hungarian Constitutional Court},
	doi = {10.5771/9783748929826-227},
	unique-id = {33209481},
	year = {2022},
	pages = {227-242},
	orcid-numbers = {Drinóczi, Timea/0000-0002-7657-3572}
}

@article{MTMT:33152439,
	title = {Illiberal Constitutional Courts of Hungary and Poland},
	url = {https://m2.mtmt.hu/api/publication/33152439},
	author = {Drinóczi, Timea},
	journal-iso = {PANSTWO I PRAWO},
	journal = {PANSTWO I PRAWO},
	volume = {10},
	unique-id = {33152439},
	issn = {0031-0980},
	year = {2022},
	pages = {3-25},
	orcid-numbers = {Drinóczi, Timea/0000-0002-7657-3572}
}

@misc{MTMT:33152379,
	title = {Sham and Smokescreen. Hungary and the Rule of law conditionality mechanism},
	url = {https://m2.mtmt.hu/api/publication/33152379},
	author = {Drinóczi, Timea},
	doi = {10.17176/20221005-230334-0},
	unique-id = {33152379},
	year = {2022},
	orcid-numbers = {Drinóczi, Timea/0000-0002-7657-3572}
}

@inbook{MTMT:33135551,
	title = {Szuverenitás. A "Hol a helyünk" kérdés értelmezése a szuverenitás, identitás és jogállamiság hármasában 2022 elején},
	url = {https://m2.mtmt.hu/api/publication/33135551},
	author = {Drinóczi, Timea},
	booktitle = {Kukorelli-kommentár},
	unique-id = {33135551},
	year = {2022},
	pages = {399-404},
	orcid-numbers = {Drinóczi, Timea/0000-0002-7657-3572}
}

@article{MTMT:33091378,
	title = {The (non)-Ratification of the Istanbul Convention by Hungary. Lessons to be Learned},
	url = {https://m2.mtmt.hu/api/publication/33091378},
	author = {Drinóczi, Timea and Balogh, Lídia},
	doi = {10.5771/0030-6444-2022-1-42},
	journal-iso = {OSTEUROPA RECHT},
	journal = {OSTEUROPA-RECHT},
	volume = {68},
	unique-id = {33091378},
	issn = {0030-6444},
	abstract = {This paper focuses on the erosion of the consensus around the Istanbul Convention due to the political obstacles to its ratification process in particular EU Member States. We warn that a black-and-white approach does not assist to understand the situation. Instead of conceptualising the rejection of the Convention as a “backlash” phenomenon, a more nuanced analysis is needed, especially in light of the ongoing EU legislative project in the field of combating gender-based violence. We first identify four main types of concerns regarding the Istanbul Convention on the international level: conservative, libertarian, “across-the-aisle” anti-feminist, and mainstream feminist concerns. Second, we consider the prevalence of these types of concerns in the Hungarian discourse, raised by the key political and civil society actors. Hungary provides an essential case study not only because of its role as a non-ratifying state and as an opponent of the EU-ratification plan but also due to the emergence of an additional (fifth kind of) concern related to the issue of migration (and asylum) in its discourse. Furthermore, the change in political situation in Europe since the adoption of the Convention in 2011 cannot be ignored. We believe that the analysis of the Hungarian discourse, may contribute to understanding the criticism towards the Convention and, as a consequential effect, facilitate the EU’s legislative efforts in the relevant fields.},
	year = {2022},
	pages = {42-60},
	orcid-numbers = {Drinóczi, Timea/0000-0002-7657-3572}
}

@inbook{MTMT:32873449,
	title = {Decision 45/2012. (XII. 29.) AB. Transitory Provisions},
	url = {https://m2.mtmt.hu/api/publication/32873449},
	author = {Drinóczi, Timea},
	booktitle = {The main lines of the jurisprudence of the Hungarian Constitutional Court},
	unique-id = {32873449},
	year = {2022},
	pages = {227-242},
	orcid-numbers = {Drinóczi, Timea/0000-0002-7657-3572}
}