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

Results found: 7

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
From constitutional point of view federalism can be described as a form of governmental system. There are then certain prerequisites that are required from the federal constitution as a fundamental law of the federation. It should divide legislative authority between separate orders of government; guarantee political and institutional autonomy of the constituent parts of which federation is composed; allow them to participate in federal decision -making process; require consent of both federal government and member states of the federation at least for its major alterations and finally set a conflict resolution procedure should they occur between federal government and member states. The article discusses different manners in which contemporary federal constitutions attempt to meet these criteria. It shows that although there are some similarities among them, the overall degree of resemblance is relatively small. This observation, based on the study of numerous federal constitutions, leads to conclusion that in terms of constitutional rules and forms federalism presents extreme variety and proves to be a very flexible form of governmental system.
PL
THE DOCTRINE OF NULLIFICATION IN THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONALISM IN THE EARLY PERIOD OF THE REPUBLIC The doctrine of nullification was one of the most important threads developed in the American political and legal papers published in the early Republic. The doctrine functioned as an element of Republican constitutionalism whose foundations grew in the millieu of democratic republicans in the last decade of the 18th century. The nullification was tantamount to the right of the States to annul the federal laws that the States found to be inconsistent with the federal Constitution. The doctrine of nullification is detectable in the papers written by John Taylor but its formulation is due to Thomas Jefferson who drew up its assumptions in the project of the Resolution of the Kentucky in 1798. In the course of time the doctrine laid the foundations for the procedure designed to settle disputes within the American federal system and functioned as an alternative device vis-à-vis the judicial review.
3
100%
EN
By constitutional convention the Queen and her representatives, the governor- -generals, can act only on the advice of their respective responsible ministers. Therefore all of the powers that are in their possession, whether their source is derived from prerogative or the constitution, are exercised not personally by them but through cabinet ministers. However, in certain extraordinary circumstances the Crown is constitutionally entitled to act on its own initiative, without or – better still – contrary to the advice that it receives. Those powers that can be exercised personally by the Queen are commonly referred to as reserve powers, sometimes also as personal prerogatives. The most important of them are the power to appoint and dismiss a prime minister and to dissolve parliament. Reserve powers also include the right to refuse royal sanction, the appointment of peers, judges or senators, as well as summoning and proroguing parliament. The scope of reserve powers differ according to local circumstances, i.e. the governor generals of Australia and Canada cannot refuse royal assent because of the judicial review procedure in these countries. They remain in reserve until the circumstances demand that they be used. When the Crown decides to act on its own initiative, its sole justification is the need to protect constitutional democracy. The author shows that the exercise of the reserve powers can serve this end very well by making – somehow ironically – the undemocratic Crown the last and the safest bulwark of democracy.
EN
Under Article V, Congress shall call a convention on the application of two-thirds of state legislatures. Convention of states has never been called, despite a number of attempts. An Article V convention has become a specific form of constitutional initiative at the federal level. It serves primarily as a convenient way to pressure Congress to propose an amendment and not to actually make federal legislature call a convention. Such a use of an Article V convention has not been very effective and only rarely proved to be successful.
PL
Zgodnie z postanowieniami artykułu V Konstytucji, konwencja w celu zaproponowania poprawek do Konstytucji jest zwoływana przez Kongres na wniosek dwóch trzecich legislatur stanowych. W dotychczasowej praktyce nigdy nie doszło do zastosowania omawianej procedury. Alternatywny tryb zmiany konstytucji przez zwołanie konwencji przekształcił się na gruncie praktyki ustrojowej w oryginalną formę inicjatywy ludowej w sprawie zmiany dokumentu. Podejmując działania zmierzające do zwołania konwencji, inicjatorzy dążą bowiem najczęściej do wymuszenia na Kongresie uchwalenia stosownej propozycji poprawki do Konstytucji. Skuteczność takiego stosowania trybu konwencji jest niewielka.
5
100%
EN
The word ‘constitution’ had only a descriptive meaning in the United Kingdom, being synonymous with the frame of government in existence before the American revolutionaries changed its sense by identifying it with the supreme law of the land. The United Kingdom does not, and indeed has never had, a constitution. And yet, it does have one, as its government operates under supreme general rules. Those rules are constitutional conventions. The word ‘constitution’ started to change its meaning in the United Kingdom when constitutional conventions emerged as rules that constrained, first, the monarch and then the parliament, in the exercising of their legal powers. In the 18th century the constitution was synonymous with law and unconstitutional behaviour was illegal. This changed in the first half of the 19th century when the British constitution became conventional. What it actually meant in the new environment was that to act in an unconstitutional way meant to act against the established convention, even if a given action was perfectly legal. Nevertheless, the British constitution is predominantly political because the supreme constitutional rules are non-legal and are not enforceable in the courts of law.
PL
Brak konstytucji w formie ustawy zasadniczej nie oznacza, że ustrój brytyjski nie przybiera formy rządów konstytucyjnych. Zasadniczy postulat konstytucjonalizmu, jakim jest wyeliminowanie arbitralności władzy przez poddanie jej niezależnym od piastunów władzy normom, realizowany jest w Wielkiej Brytanii przez konwenanse konstytucyjne, będące normami konstytucyjnymi o charakterze pozaprawnym, niemożliwymi do wyegzekwowania w postępowaniu sądowym. Pojęcie konstytucji zaczęło nabierać w Wielkiej Brytanii normatywnego znaczenia w pierwszej połowie XIX w. wraz z kształtowaniem się konwenansów, na których oparte zostało funkcjonowanie kluczowych instytucji ustrojowych: gabinetu i premiera. Wcześniej konstytucja była synonimem systemu rządów. Wielka Brytania ma więc współcześnie konstytucję w znaczeniu normatywnym, ponieważ ustrój tego państwa oparty jest na normach wyższego rzędu determinujących sposób wykonywania władzy państwowej, znajdujących się poza zasięgiem tych, których postępowanie regulują. Konwenanse konstytucyjne stały się normami eliminującymi arbitralność władzy nie tylko dlatego, że determinowały relacje pomiędzy egzekutywą a parlamentem, ale dlatego że wprowadzając do brytyjskiego ustroju zasadę suwerenności ludu, nałożyły na władzę ustawodawczą parlamentu ograniczenia konstytucyjne. Konwenanse konstytucyjne stały się podstawą politycznej konstytucji Wielkiej Brytanii. Wciąż stanowią one podstawę rządów konstytucyjnych w tym państwie mimo dostrzegalnego w ostatnich latach dążenia do również prawnego ograniczenia władzy państwowej.
EN
The Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 came into force on 15 September 2011. The Act introduces a new way of dissolving Parliament, replacing the prerogative power of the Monarch to dissolve the House of Commons. Under the provisions of the Act, the House’s future terms are fixed to five years. Early general elections may be held when either of the following conditions is met. First, if a motion for an early general election is agreed either by at least two-thirds of the whole House (including vacant seats). Second, if a motion of no confidence is passed and no alternative government is confirmed by the Commons within 14 days by means of a confidence motion.
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.