The question of nullity of law-making resolutions of international organizations is essential not only for the organization itself and its law, but also for the member states, which are the addressees of these resolutions. First, the member states, being obliged to implement certain resolutions, must be certain that they will be implementing an act which is both valid and binding. Second, in order to implement a law-making resolution, states may undertake certain legal or factual actions. Hence the nullity of such a resolution would result in a series of consequences, including the problem of restoring the factual and legal conditions existing before a null and void resolution has been implemented. The complex problem of nullity of law-making resolutions requires the consideration of many issues. First, there is the issue of the cause(s) of nullity, i.e. what types of events would cause the resolution to lose its validity. Second, there is the problem concerning the effects of nullity, i.e. is it possible for a null and void resolution to have legal effects; is it possible to validate null and void resolution? Another issue concerns the applicable procedure for the declaration of nullity. In this context, a new question arises: whether member states or the organization itself have the competence to question the resolution? These issues are at the core of the discussion presented in this article.
European Union’s accession to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is a significant legal, political and organizational challenge. Its specific character is primarily due to the fact that the Union is a non-state entity. The aforementioned accession raises a number of questions, to which the answers have been sought not only by the negotiators of both organizations, but also by researchers and other experts. The purpose of this article is to analyze some of the institutional problems, seen primarily from the perspective of public international law. Firstly, the object of the article is to analyze the problem of choosing an appropriate legal form and scope of the accession. Subsequently, some of the most important institutional aspects of the EU's participation in the system of the Convention are considered, namely the issue of the representation of the Union in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, as well as the potential choice of a judge of the Union in the European Court of Human Rights.
European Union’s accession to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is a significant legal, political and organizational challenge. Its specific character is primarily due to the fact that the Union is a non-state entity. The aforementioned accession raises a number of questions, to which the answers have been sought not only by the negotiators of both organizations, but also by researchers and other experts. The purpose of this article is to analyze some of the institutional problems, seen primarily from the perspective of public international law. Firstly, the object of the article is to analyze the problem of choosing an appropriate legal form and scope of the accession. Subsequently, some of the most important institutional aspects of the EU's participation in the system of the Convention are considered, namely the issue of the representation of the Union in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, as well as the potential choice of a judge of the Union in the European Court of Human Rights.
Celem niniejszego artykułu jest odpowiedź na pytanie, czy i w jakim zakresie prawo międzynarodowe i europejskie nakłada na Polskę obowiązek eliminacji stereotypów związanych z płcią poprzez odpowiednie kształtowanie programów nauczania oraz treści podręczników szkolnych, a także czy normy międzynarodowe formułują wobec Polski obowiązek prowadzenia edukacji na rzecz równości płci. Przedmiot badań i analizy stanowią zarówno umowy międzynarodowe, jak i dokumenty o charakterze prawnie niewiążącym, przyjęte na różnych poziomach współpracy międzynarodowej: pod auspicjami ONZ, w ramach Rady Europy, a także przez OECD. Ze względu na jego specyfikę, odrębnej analizie poddano regulacje pierwotnego i wtórnego prawa Unii Europejskiej, także i w tym wypadku zwracając uwagę na regulacje niewiążące. Objęcie zakresem badań standardów sformułowanych pod auspicjami trzech głównych podmiotów kształtujących prawnomiędzynarodowe zobowiązania Polski w obrębie szeroko pojętej problematyki równości płci w edukacji, tj. ONZ, Rady Europy i Unii Europejskiej umożliwiło dokonanie kompleksowej rekonstrukcji obowiązków nałożonych na Polskę przez prawo międzynarodowe i europejskie w badanym obszarze.
EN
The purpose of this article is to answer the question whether, and to what extent, international law and the European Union law imposes on Poland the obligation to eliminate gender stereotypes, by curriculum development and proper formation of textbooks, and whether international standards require Poland to provide education on gender equality. The subject of this research and analysis represent both international agreements and non-binding documents adopted at different levels of international cooperation: under the auspices of the UN, the Council of Europe, as well as by the OECD. Due to its specificity, separate analysis has been conducted on primary and secondary European Union law and also in this case, the attention has been drawn up to non-binding regulations. By analysing standards within the broader issue of gender equality in education, formulated under the auspices of the three main actors creating Polish obligations under international law, i.e. the UN, the Council of Europe and the European Union it was possible to conduct a comprehensive investigation of the obligations imposed on Poland by international and European law in the study area.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.