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

Results found: 3

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
1

Postępowanie dyscyplinarne w Straży Granicznej i Biurze Ochrony Rządu w orzecznictwie sądów administracyjnych

100%
Szustakiewicz P.
Przegląd Prawa Publicznego
|
2013
|
issue 6
44-60
EN
Polish Border Guard and the Government Protection Bureau are uniformed services whose status officers and the rules of the service are regulated in a similar manner. However, in the case of the disciplinary proceedings in both services there are significant differences in the legislation governing the liability of officers. A Polish Border Guard officer is subject to disciplinary action for the violation of professional discipline, ethics violations and other cases established by law. The list of acts for which he is liable to disciplinary action is closed. However, an officer of the Government Protection Bureau renders himself liable to disciplinary action for violation of professional discipline and in other cases provided for by law, and therefore the list of disciplinary offenses is open. A disciplinary superior in Polish Border Guard and the Government Protection Bureau combines the functions of the entity engaged in the disciplinary proceedings and adjudicating, and an accused officer can use the help of a professional attorney. The rights of accused officers should be strictly observed by their disciplinary superiors. Weaknesses in this area result in the repeal of disciplinary decisions by the administrative courts. The penalty catalogue in both of the uniformed services is similar. However, the decision on the sentence should always provide reasons for the choice and severity of penalty. The disciplinary superior justifying the penalty should rely on the objectives of proceedings, the nature of the offense and the attitude of the punished officer. No ruling shall be allowed, unless it provides reasons for disciplinary punishment.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Pozycja prawna Prezesa Urzędu Ochrony Danych Osobowych – ustrój i kompetencje polskiego organu nadzoru

100%
Szustakiewicz P.
Kontrola Państwowa
|
2018
|
vol. 63
|
issue 6 (383)
8-18
EN
The General Data Protection Regulation (RODO), which replaced Directive 95/46/EC on the protection of personal data adopted over twenty years ago, has strengthened the position of the national body supervising personal data protection. The supervision body should now be completely independent of the government administration and have appropriate resources to effectively implement the provisions of RODO. The competence of the Polish supervision body are set forth in the Act of 10th May 2018 on the protection of personal data. In place of the General Inspector for Personal Data Protection (GIODO) a new body has been appointed – the President of the Personal Data Protection Office (PUODO). The Act also presents in detail the principles and course of control proceedings of PUODO, including, in the first place, the rights and duties of the entity subject to control.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Zagadnienie unifikacji przepisów regulujących stosunek służbowy funkcjonariuszy służb mundurowych

100%
Szustakiewicz P.
|
2019
|
vol. 11
|
issue 21
82-95
PL
Obecnie w Polsce działa dziesięć służb mundurowych: Agencja Bezpieczeństwa Wewnętrznego, Agencja Wywiadu, Policja, Straż Graniczna, Państwowa Straż Pożarna, Służba Kontrwywiadu Wojskowego, Służba Wywiadu Wojskowego, Centralne Biuro Antykorupcyjne, Służba Ochrony Państwa oraz Straż Więzienna. Stosunek prawny łączący funkcjonariuszy z poszczególnymi służbami, regulujący zasady przyjmowania kandydatów do tych służb, prawa i obowiązki funkcjonariuszy oraz zasady odpowiedzialności dyscyplinarnej jest nazywany stosunkiem służbowym. Polski ustawodawca zdecydował się – mimo wielu podobieństw – uregulować przepisy dotyczące stosunków służbowych dla każdej ze służb oddzielnie. Powoduje to problemy w interpretacji tych przepisów zarówno przez organy administracji, jak i sądy. Dlatego też lepszym rozwiązaniem byłoby zawarcie przepisów, o których mowa, dotyczących wszystkich służb mundurowych, w jednym akcie prawnym.
EN
In modern Poland there are ten uniformed services: Internal Security Agency, Foreign Intelligence Agency, Police, Border Guard, State Fire Service, Military Counterintelligence Service, Military Intelligence Service, Central Anti-Corruption Bureau, State Protection Service and Prison Guard. The legal relationship between officers and individual services regulates the rules of admission to these services, the rights and duties of officers and the principles of disciplinary liability – and it is called a service relationship. The Polish legislator decided, despite many similarities, to regulate the service relationship for each of the services separately. This causes problems in the interpretation of these regulations by both administrative authorities and courts. Therefore, a better solution would be to regulate the service relationship for all uniformed services in one legal act.
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.