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

Results found: 12

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 judiciary in the Polish People’s Republic was not a separate, self-governing sphere of power. The judiciary was under the supervision of the Polish United Workers Party (PZPR) and the Ministry of Justice. Political and executive authorities decided upon the staffing and professional matters of judges. In autumn 1980, on the basis of the August Agreements, independent trade unions of judiciary workers were formed in the courts. Judges, associated in them, put forward their own demands and thanks to the strength of trade unions they exerted pressure on the Minister of Justice se- eking chances to push through systemic changes, which would guarantee independence and self-governance of the judiciary. Implementation of the judges demands would de- prive the PZPR and the Ministry of Justice of the ability to govern in the sphere of justice. The authorities did not intend to resign from these prerogatives. But the Ministry of Justice, devoid of PZPR political support, gradually gave way to the judges demands. As a result of ongoing discussion in the Ministry of Justice in the years 1980–1981, two concepts of self-governance of the judiciary were created: the judges concept of decision-making self-governance and the ministerial concept of quasi self-governance with consultative prerogatives. They were reflected in multi-variant draft amendment to the law on common courts, prepared by the Ministry of Justice in November 1981. The ministerial concept became the basis of subsequent changes made in the reform of the judiciary, performed under the dictation of the PZPR in 1984–1985. Concepts from the years 1980–1981 evolved and became the basis for the reform of the judiciary system in the systemic transition period in 1989. In great measure, self-governance of the judges functions to this day on the basis of the solutions developed in 1980–1981.
EN
The sessions of the 9th Extraordinary Congress of the Polish United Workers’ Party (PUWP) was preceded by a profound public critique of both the structures and the activity of the judiciary and administration of justice. The corporations of lawyers demanded to strengthen the independence of the judiciary. They demanded to abolish the regulations on the so called “warranty” of socialist justice and to abolish the term of office in the Supreme Court. The Party, however, had no intention of changing and getting rid of legal regulations that allowed them to control the sphere of the judiciary. In the programme presented at the congress, the Central Committee of the PUWP emphasized the need to strengthen the existing structures of the socialist system of justice that in their opinion ensured the ‘independence’ of the judiciary. This approach of the PUWP towards the system of justice was rejected by a group of delegates who criticized the programme presented by the Central Committee at a meeting of a task group. They pointed out the need for tangible legal changes in the system administration of justice as postulated by the corporations of lawyers. These views were nonetheless found to be anti-socialist, and were not included in the final text of the congress resolution, which merely reiterated the theses set forth in the Central Committee’s programme statement.
EN
The Prosecutor’s Office of the Polish People’s Republic was a highly politicised organ. Most prosecutors have linked their careers with the ruling Polish United Workers’ Party. However, the momentous events of August 1980, exerted an influence on this milieu. The social renewal movement under the banner of “Solidarity” did not find many sym- pathisers. Prosecutors related to the political system, however, created at the turn of 1980–1981, a new Labour Union of Prosecutor’s Office Workers. Through this organiz- sation, they conducted a dialogue with the authorities. Prosecutors expected changes that would strengthen their independence, role and position in state structures.
EN
Institutions of the Tribunal of the State and constitutional responsibility were seen by the communist regime as irrelevant and unnecessary in a socialist system. The Supreme People’s State officers had only held a political responsibility before the Communist Party. Appointment the Tribunal of the State in March 26, 1982 and the introduction constitutional responsibility to the political system had to be regarded as an unexpected move by the communist authorities. The political decision on this issue was taken in the face of tumultuous events of August 1980 and born of the “Solidarity” movement, which was a threat to the hegemonic position of the Polish United Workers’ Party. In a public and inside the party came up a mainstream of the clearing. On each side could be heard voices of dissatisfaction of the way in which the state and the national economy were routed by the Political Bureau and the government. Changes at the highest echelons of power were not sufficient to calm these moods. Society and the masses of party members called for the public trial of those, who were responsibility for bringing the country to the economic crisis. In this way, the Tribunal of the State had become a tool in the hands of the new communists leaders, designed to achieve the political goals.
PL
VII Letnia Szkoła Historii Najnowszej 2–7 września 2013 r.
EN
The presented document was included among informational materials for a session of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the Polish United Workers’ Party (KC PZPR) on February 28, 1984. It was a report drafted by the Administrative Department of the Central Committee of PZPR, discussing both the social and political situation in lawyers’ circles. This topic was high on the agenda of political debates among communist party decision-makers, due to the strong influence the ‘Solidarność’ movement had on lawyer’s circles. Since the introduction of martial law on December 13, 1981, the communist party was trying to withdraw licences to practice a profession for all judges, prosecutors, attorneys and legal counsels who supported ‘Solidarność’. For this reason, the Administrative Department of the Central Committee of PZPR kept a close watch on the lawyers’ circles.
PL
Lech Mażewski, Długa dekada lat siedemdziesiątych (1968– –1981). Rola nowelizacji z 10 lutego 1976 r. Konstytucji PRL z 22 lipca 1952 r. w ewolucji ustroju PRL na tle konstytucji europejskich państw socjalistycznych, Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek, Toruń 2011, 367 stron
EN
After regaining independence in 1918, the General Counsel of the Republic of Poland was established. This institution gathered together a group of excellent professionals and became famous for its effectiveness in defending the interests of the Treasury. After World War II it was resurrected. The General Counsel became an exceptional institution in the new political system, imposed according to patterns of the Soviet Union. The nationalization of industry, the expansion of state ownership and economic administration to colossal proportions meant that the General Counsel could no longer fulfill its role. In 1951 it was liquidated and the Office for Legal Assistance established. Three years later, Soviet models were reproduced by introducing a decentralized model of legal services for the Treasury. This led to the separation of the profession of legal advisers. Decentralized system lasted over half a century. In 2006, the General Counsel of the Treasury was reactivated.
PL
Po odzyskaniu niepodległości w 1918 r. w Polsce powołana została Prokuratoria Generalna RP. Zasłynęła, jako organ skupiający znakomitych fachowców, skutecznie broniący interesów Skarbu Państwa. Po drugiej wojnie światowej doszło do jej odtworzenia. Prokuratoria Generalna była wyjątkową instytucją w nowym systemie ustrojowym, narzuconym według wzorców Związku Radzieckiego. Nacjonalizacja przemysłu, rozszerzenie własności państwa i rozbudowa do kolosalnych rozmiarów administracji państwowo-gospodarczej sprawiły jednak, iż Prokuratoria Generalna nie mogła dłużej wypełniać swojej roli. W 1951 r. została zlikwidowana, a w jej miejsce powołano Urząd Zastępstwa Prawnego i wydziały prawne przy prezydiach wojewódzkich rad narodowych. Trzy lata później doszło do decentralizacji obsługi prawnej Skarbu Państwa i państwowych jednostek gospodarczych. Doprowadziło to do wyodrębnienia się zawodu radcy prawnego. System ten przetrwał do 2006 r., kiedy to wznowiła działalność Prokuratoria Generalna Skarbu Państwa.
Z Dziejów Prawa
|
2018
|
vol. 11
|
issue 2
255-278
EN
This paper deals with an issue of legal representation throughout the history of Po- land, with special regard to the first decade after World War II. The Office of the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Poland created after the restoration of Poland’s sovereignty in 1918, providing a high quality of legal representation of the State Treasury, was reinstated by the communist authority after World War II in order to secure financial interests of the newly built people’s state. Nationalization of industry, an introduction of centrally-controlled economy, and expansion of the state administrative-economic apparatus to colossal proportions, however, led to a situation in which the centralized model of legal handling of the State Treasury ceased to be efficient. After the abolishment of the Office of the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Poland in 1951, the authorities attempted to implement a mixed model of legal representation. However, it only lasted for three years, and eventually, the Soviet model was copied - full decentraliza- tion of legal handling of the apparatus of authority, administration, and state-owned enterprises. The decentralized model of legal management of the State Treasury’s interests remained in place unusually long, for over half a century. It outlasted the regime transformation by 16 years. Attempts to reinstate the centralized system of legal representation of the State Treasury were undertaken repeatedly (in 1990, 1992, and 1998). However, it was not until 2005, when the politi- cal climate was ready for this reform and the appointment of the Office of the Prosecutor General of the State Treasury, which resumed its activity in March 2006.
EN
After the Second World War, the political system of Poland was rebuilt according to the model of the Soviet Union. However, the common courts were rebuilt on the basis of pre-war political regulations. The pre-war judges were admitted to the courts in large numbers, despite their attempts to maintain their independence. It was extremely difficult in the era of omnipresent Marxist-Lenin ideology, which permeated every area of life, and the primacy of politics over law. The authorities did not intend to tolerate the existence of a judiciary independent of their influ- ence. Without having their own legal forces, they tried to break judges’ characters. The judges were subjected to political and ideological indoctrination. When this did not produce satisfactory results, the government decided to replace the pre-war judicial staff for “new types of judges,” brought up in the spirit of obedience to the authorities in law schools, operating under the aus- pices of the Ministry of Justice. The replacement of staff was carried out in the years 1950-1954 by manipulating the system law, using the method of “administrative deportations,” disregarding any moral and ethical principles, the quality of jurisprudence and the welfare of citizens. This was done under the hypocritical guise of the “democratisation of the justice system” slogan.
DE
Nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg wurde Polen nach dem Vorbild der Sowjet- union strukturell umgebaut. Ordentliche Gerichte wurden allerdings auf der Grundlage der poli- tischen Vorschriften der Vorkriegszeit wiederaufgebaut. Die Vorkriegsrichter wurden dort mas- senhaft angestellt, die sich darum bemühten, ihre Unabhängigkeit zu bewahren. In den Zeiten der allumfassenden marxistisch-leninistischen Ideologie und des Vorrangs der Politik vor dem Recht war dies äußerst schwierig. Die Behörden wollten die Existenz einer von ihrem Einfluss un- abhängigen Justiz nicht tolerieren. Ohne über eigene Rechtskräfte zu verfügen, wurde versucht, die Charaktere der Richter zu beugen. Sie wurden einer politisch-ideologischen Indoktrination unterzogen. Als dies nicht zu den zufriedenstellenden Ergebnissen führte, wurde beschlossen, die Richter aus der Vorkriegszeit gegen die „Richter des neuen Typs“ auszutauschen, die im Geiste des Gehorsams gegenüber den Behörden in den unter der Schirmherrschaft des Justizmi- nisteriums funktionierenden Rechtsschulen erzogen wurden. Der Personalaustausch erfolgte in den Jahren 1950-1954, indem das Verfassungsrecht manipuliert wurde, die Methode der „Ver- waltungsvertreibungen“ angewendet wurde, ohne auf die moralischen und ethischen Prinzipien, die Qualität der Rechtsprechung und das Wohl der Bürger zu achten. Dies geschah unter dem heuchlerischen Deckmantel von den Parolen der „Demokratisierung der Justiz“.
PL
Po II wojnie światowej Polska była ustrojowo przebudowywana na wzór Związku Radzieckiego. Sądy powszechne odbudowywano jednak w oparciu o przedwojenne przepisy ustrojowe. Masowo przyjmowano do nich przedwojennych sędziów, którzy starali się utrzymać swoją niezawisłość. Było to niezwykle trudne w dobie wszechogarniającej każdą dziedzinę życia ideologii marksistowsko-leninowskiej i prymatu polityki nad prawem. Władze nie zamierzały tolerować istnienia sądownictwa niezależnego od ich wpływu. Nie posiadając własnych sił prawniczych, starano się naginać charaktery sędziów. Poddano ich indoktrynacji polityczno-ideologicznej. Gdy to nie dawało zadowalających efektów, zdecydowano o wymianie przedwojennej kadry sędziowskiej na „sędziów nowego typu”, wychowywanych w duchu posłuszeństwa władzy w szkołach prawniczych, funkcjonujących pod auspicjami Ministerstwa Sprawiedliwości. Wymianę kadr przeprowadzono w latach 1950-1954 manipulując prawem ustrojowym, stosując metodę „rugów administracyjnych”, nie bacząc na jakiekolwiek zasady moralne i etyczne, na jakość orzecznictwa i dobro obywateli. Czyniono to pod obłudnym płaszczykiem haseł „demokratyzacji wymiaru sprawiedliwości”.
PL
Publikacja ma na celu zaprezentowanie protokołu z konferencji odbytej 16 września 1944 r. w Białymstoku na temat zorganizowania sądownictwa powszechnego. W konferencji udział wzięli ocaleli białostoccy prawnicy oraz delegacja Resortu Sprawiedliwości Polskiego Komitetu Wyzwolenia Narodowego. Zapoczątkowała ona odbudowę Sądu Okręgowego w Białymstoku. Protokół ukazuje problemy, jakie napotykano przy odbudowie białostockiego sądownictwa. Miały one jednak charakter powszechny. Dotyczyły głównie znalezienia odpowiednich siedzib dla sądów, wyposażenia lokali i zapewnienia sędziom podstawowych narzędzi pracy oraz uzupełnienia wakatów na stanowiskach sędziowskich. Dokument prezentuje ponadto praktykę działania Resortu Sprawiedliwości wykraczającą poza ramy prawne, w szczególności w zakresie obsadzania stanowisk sędziowskich. Ukazuje także propagandowe znaczenie organizacji tego typu konferencji i próby ukrycia faktycznych intencji władz, przez składanie fałszywych zapewnień, iż przyszłe reformy zmierzać miały do demokratyzacji i zwiększania niezależności sądownictwa.
EN
The publication aims to present the protocol of the conference held on September 16, 1944 in Białystok on the organization of the common judiciary. Conference participants were surviving lawyers from Białystok and a delegation of the Ministry of Justice of the Polish Committee of National Liberation. It initiated the reconstruction of the District Court in Białystok. This document shows the problems encountered in the reconstruction of the Bialystok judiciary. However, they were universal. The problems mainly concerned finding suitable seats for courts, equipping premises and providing basic work tools for judges, as well as filling vacancies in judicial positions. In addition, it presents the practice of the Ministry of Justice’s activities going beyond the legal framework, in particular in the area of staffing judges. It also shows the propaganda significance of organizing this type of conference. Attempts were made to hide the real intentions of the authorities by making false assurances that future reforms were aimed at democratizing and increasing the independence of the judiciary.
EN
The publication deals with a short episode of the Court of Appeal in Bialystok between 1949-1950. It is part of the author's research work on the problem of reconstruction and transformation of the common judiciary during the period of building the socialist system in Poland in the first decade after World War II. Moreover, the aim of the publication is to answer an important, immediately emerging question; why the Court of Appeal in Bialystok was established at all? This was closely related to the fundamental changes that were taking place in the common judiciary in the years 1944-1954, which led to the politicization of the justice system. However, the reforms were not limited to the systemic adaptation of the judiciary to the needs of the authorities. The changes went much further, towards carrying out staff purges and eliminating from the judiciary pre-war judges who did not want to submit to political pressure and ideological indoctrination. The establishment of the Court of Appeal in Bialystok was part of the planned reorganization of the common court system, which was supposed to simplify the staff exchange process. That is why the publication also widely concerns the general changes that took place in the judiciary during this period. This approach helps to show intentions of the authorities and true reasons of establishing the Court of Appeal in Bialystok. These are presented in the decisions taken at the meetings of the Collegium of the Ministry of Justice and fragments of the reports of the Judicial Supervision Department, as quoted in the publication.
PL
Publikacja traktuje o krótkim epizodzie istnienia Sądu Apelacyjnego w Białymstoku w latach 1949-1950. Stanowi element prac badawczych autora nad problemem odbudowy i transformacji sądownictwa powszechnego w okresie kształtowania się w Polsce ustroju socjalistycznego w pierwszej dekadzie po II wojnie światowej. Jest kolejną publikacją dotyczącą dziejów sądownictwa białostockiego. Ma ona przypomnieć o mało znanym fakcie powołania Sądu Apelacyjnego w Białymstoku w 1949 r. i przybliżyć jego krótką, gdyż zaledwie półtoraroczną działalność. Ponadto celem publikacji jest udzielenie odpowiedzi na istotne, nasuwające się od razu pytanie, dlaczego w ogóle doszło do powołania Sądu Apelacyjnego w Białymstoku? Miało to ścisły związek z gruntownymi przemianami, jakie dokonywały się w sądownictwie powszechnym w latach 1944-1954, które zmierzały do upolitycznienia wymiaru sprawiedliwości. Reformy nie ograniczały się jednak wyłącznie do ustrojowego dostosowywania sądownictwa do potrzeb władz. Przemiany szły o wiele dalej, w kierunku przeprowadzenia czystek kadrowych i wyeliminowania z sądownictwa sędziów przedwojennych, którzy nie chcieli poddać się politycznym naciskom i ideologicznej indoktrynacji. Powołanie Sądu Apelacyjnego w Białymstoku było częścią planowanej reorganizacji sądownictwa powszechnego, która miała jednocześnie ułatwić przeprowadzenie procesu wymiany kadrowej. Dlatego w publikacji szeroko podejmowane są także kwestie ogólnych przemian, jakie zachodziły w tym okresie w sądownictwie. Podejście takie pozwala unaocznić intencje władz i faktyczne przyczyny powołania Sądu Apelacyjnego w Białymstoku. Te zaś dosadnie zaprezentowane zostały w cytowanych w publikacji decyzjach podejmowanych na posiedzeniach Kolegium Ministerstwa Sprawiedliwości i fragmentach raportów Departamentu Nadzoru Sądowego.
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.