Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 8

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The article focuses on the order and distinction deprivation procedure executed by the President of the Republic of Poland. The Author considers the function and legal nature thereof, a possibility of judicial review and results caused thereby. The research carried out indicates that the analysed competence of the President of the Republic of Poland shall be a manifestation of fulfillment of the state supreme representative’s function, whereas the performance thereof shall not constitute activity in the scope of public administration. It serves mostly to pro- tect the honour of the orders and distinctions as well as – to some extend – it may also play a preventive and repressive role. A material portion of the research carried out shall concern a possibility of judicial review of a decision made by the President on order or distinction deprivation. The Author opposes the opinion of the majority of scholars that the review shall be excluded. Moreover, the Author indicates that such a statement is in contrary to the constitutional guarantees concerning the protection of acquired rights, the right to a fair trial as well as the right to protect honour and good name
EN
The subject of the article is an analysis of institutions of the state of epidemic emergency and the state of the epidemic. The author considers their substance and legal nature, as well as the procedure and conditions for their introduction and cancellation. A significant part of the considerations is devoted to the regulation on the introduction of the state of epidemic emergency or the state of the epidemic. The subject of the analysis is its legal nature, content, and control of its legality. The studies carried out lead to the conclusion that while the very concept of anti-epidemic states deserves approval, their current model needs to be fundamentally changed because it is contrary to the constitutional principles of restricting rights and freedoms.
EN
The subject matter of this article is the reconstruction of the normative content of the reference contained in Article 18 (2) of the Act on the State Tribunal which concerns application of provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure in proceedings before this authority. Discussion on this issue is preceded by an analysis of the abovementioned provision in the light of theory of law concerning referring regulations as well as legislative technique. The author also defined the scope of reference specified in Article 18(2) of the Act on the State Tribunal. Subsequent analyses concern the possibility of using in proceedings before the State Tribunal particular legal institutions appropriate for Polish criminal proceedings. The studies show that this reference is of a very broad nature and significantly supplements the provisions of the Act on the State Tribunal. However, their construction raises doubts as to their interpretation, therefore the legislator recommends their specification.
EN
The fundamental aim of this article is the analysis of the constitutional standards applicable to expropriation being a radical interference in the sphere of ownership and other proprietary rights. The author reconstructs firstly the constitutional definition of expropriation, which – due to the nature of the constitution – must have an autonomous meaning, regardless of other, more detailed statutory regulations governing this issue. Secondly, an attempt is made to interpret two main grounds for expropriation mentioned in Article 21, section 2 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. The considerations refer as well to the issue of possible influence of other constitutional provisions on the meaning of expropriation. Most importantly, whether Article 31, section 3, which concerns the restrictions of human and citizen rights and freedoms, should be applied in instances not regulated by Article 21, section 2. These considerations constitute the basis for conclusions, both in terms of legal regulations and practice in applying the expropriation procedure.
PL
Przedmiotem artykułu jest problematyka wyjątków od zasady dyskontynuacji prac pol-skiego parlamentu. Punktem wyjścia do dalszych rozważań jest stwierdzenie, że zasada ta, choć niesie za sobą pewne korzyści, ma również wady, które uzasadniają dopuszczal-ność formułowania od niej wyjątków. Następnie autor wskazuje na jej charakter prawny, który rzutuje na możliwość ich określania. W dalszej kolejności analizie poddane zostały wyjątki od zasady dyskontynuacji przewidziane w ustawodawstwie oraz regulaminach parlamentarnych. Przeprowadzone analizy doprowadziły do wniosku, że dyskontynu-acja prac polskiego parlamentu ma charakter zasady konstytucyjnej, od której wyjątki mogą być ustanawiane jedynie w drodze wyraźnej decyzji prawodawcy.
EN
The subject of the study is the exception to the principle of discontinuation of works of the Polish parliament issue. The initial point of reference for further discussion is the statement that the principle despite its benefits has also disadvantages which justify admis-sibility to formulate exceptions thereto. Then the author indicates its legal nature which has an effect on possible determination thereof. The exceptions to the discontinuation rule in legislation and parliamentary regulations were further analysed. Analyses car-ried out have led to the conclusion that the discontinuation of works of the Polish par-liament has the nature of the constitutional principle and exceptions thereto may be es-tablished only by an express decision of the legislator.
PL
Artykuł dotyczy problematyki przejściowej niemożności sprawowania urzędu przez prezydenta RP. Konstytucja wyróżnia aż trzy rodzaje takiej niemożności. Pierwszy obejmuje sytuacje, w których prezydent jest zdolny do poinformowania o tym fakcie, drugi – gdy nie może tego uczynić, trzeci natomiast wiąże się z zawieszeniem sprawowania urzędu przez prezydenta w związku z postawieniem go w stan oskarżenia przed Trybunałem Stanu. W artykule omówiono po kolei każde z tych zagadnień. Autor odnosi się m.in. do przesłanek stwierdzenia przeszkody w sprawowaniu urzędu przez prezydenta RP, a także poddaje szczegółowej analizie przepisy nowej ustawy o Trybunale Konstytucyjnym dotyczące tego zagadnienia. Refleksje autora uzupełnione są odpowiednimi wnioskami oraz postulatami nowelizacji zarówno Konstytucji RP, jak i wspomnianej ustawy.
EN
This paper discusses temporary impossibility of performing the functions by the Polish President. The Polish Constitution defines three kinds of such impossibility. First of all, there are situations when the President may inform about this impossibility, secondly – when s/he cannot do this, and thirdly – the President may be suspended because of being arraigned before the State Tribunal. Each of these situations is considered in the paper, one by one. The author refers, among others, to the grounds on which impossibility of performing the functions by the Polish President is declared and analyses in detail the provisions of the new Constitutional Tribunal Act concerning this issue. The author’s comments are accompanied by related conclusions and suggestions concerning the amendment of both the Polish Constitution and the said act.
EN
Among the issues relating to extraordinary states, those concerning their content and – possibly – the procedure to be introduced. Relatively less attention is usually paid to other legal issues concerning them. One of these is the issue of compensation for property losses resulting from the limitation of human rights during extraordinary states.This topic does not seem to have been sufficiently elaborated in the legal doctrine so far. Therefore, the subject of this article is the analysis of legal solutions concerning the compensation of property losses resulting from the limitation of the human and civil rights and freedom in the time of the extraordinary state. The fundamental research objective is to verify whether the legal regulations devoted to this issue have been shaped properly and in particular, whether – at least potentially – they do not adversely affect the decision-making process concerning the introduction of the extraordinary state.The relevant de lege ferenda conclusions included in the summary are the result of the Author’s insight into inconsistencies in that matter.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.