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

Results found: 5

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Republic of Lithuania
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
100%
EN
The aim of the paper is to analyse the legal position of the Central Electoral Commission in the electoral law of the Republic of Lithuania. The considerations focus, firstly, on defining the status of this body, and secondly, on identifying the tasks imposed by the legislator on the CEC. In the second case, the analysis focuses only on the general outline of the Commission’s tasks, as their detailed analysis would require the preparation of a separate study. The analysis also aimes at verifying whether the Lithuanian legislator, when shaping the regulations concerning the Commission, took into account the European standards for the organisation and functioning of central electoral bodies, as defined by the Venice Commission. On the basis of the conducted research work, an attempt was made to determine to which of the electoral administration models the Lithuanian model should be included, taking into account the location and tasks of the CEC. It should be added that the analysis of the above issues seems justified, as so far this issue has not been comprehensively discussed in the Polish legal or political science literature, and moreover, it has rarely been discussed in the Lithuanian literature. In order to achieve the above-mentioned objectives, the formal and legal method was used and the doctrinal work was analysed. In addition, a comparative legal method was used to show the differences and similarities between the central authorities of other countries, and an empirical method was used to outline the practical aspects of the functioning of the CEC.
PL
Celem niniejszego artykułu jest analiza zadań Kontrolera Sejmu w Republice Litewskiej. W artykule wzięto pod uwagę ustawę o kontrolerach Sejmu Republiki Litewskiej z 2004 r., dokonując oceny najważniejszych przepisów prawnych, zawartych w tymże akcie. Analiza zadań kontrolera Sejmu Republiki Litewskiej w świetle litewskiej ustawy wydaje się być zagadnieniem wartym naukowej eksploracji, bowiem brakuje w polskiej literaturze specjalistycznej rozważań na ten temat. Przedmiot analizy jest zagadnieniem nadal aktualnym, gdyż Litwa – podobnie jak państwa Europy Środkowej i Wschodniej – w okresie transformacji ustrojowej powołała do życia instytucję ombudsmana, który stoi na straży przestrzegania praw obywateli. Realizacji celu badawczego służyło zastosowanie metody analizy instytucjonalno-prawnej, która pomocna była w analizie litewskich aktów prawnych.
EN
The purpose of this article is to analyze the tasks of the Parliament’s Inspector (Ombudsman) in the Republic of Lithuania. The article takes into account the 2004 Act on Parliament’s Inspectors of the Republic of Lithuania, assessing the most important legal provisions contained in that act. The analysis of the tasks of the inspector of the Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania in the light of the Lithuanian act seems to be an issue worth scientific exploration. In the Polish specialist literature lacks considerations on this subject. The subject of the analysis is still a topical, because Lithuania – similarly to the countries of Central and Eastern Europe – during the political transformation established the institution of the ombudsman, which protects the rights of citizens. The research goal was achieved by using the method of institutional and legal analysis, which was helpful in the analysis of Lithuanian legal acts.
PL
Artykuł dotyczy udziału prezydenta Republiki Litewskiej w procedurze ustawodawczej na gruncie obowiązującej Konstytucji przyjętej w referendum z dnia 25 października 1992, a także, tytułem wstępu i w bardzo ograniczonym zakresie, na tle poprzednich uregulowań konstytucyjnych, począwszy od odzyskania niepodległości przez Litwę dnia 16 lutego 1918 r. Konstytucja Republiki Litewskiej zapewnia prezydentowi udział w stanowieniu prawa już na etapie inicjatywy ustawodawczej, a także przy promulgacji ustaw, która wiąże się z obowiązkiem podpisania i ogłoszenia ustawy, ewentualnie zwrócenia ustawy do Sejmu w celu jej ponownego uchwalenia (weto). W treści artykułu przedstawione zostały konkretne regulacje konstytucyjne dotyczące tych instytucji, jak również wątpliwości, które mogą powstać bądź powstały na gruncie tych przepisów. W tekście uwzględniono również przepisy innych obowiązujących ustaw oraz regulaminów, w zakresie, w jakim wyznaczają one ramy korzystania przez prezydenta z jego kompetencji w procedurze ustawodawczej. Z uwagi na odrębność uregulowań ustawy zasadniczej oddzielnie omówiono kwestie związane z udziałem prezydenta w zmianie bądź uzupełnieniu Konstytucji.
EN
The paper describes the participation of the president of the Republic of Lithuania in the legislative procedure, in relation to the Constitution in force adopted by the referendum on October 25th, 1992. The paper also presents the president’s participation regarding former constitutional regulations, starting from restoration of Lithuania’s independence on February 16th, 1918. This is presented mainly as an introduction and in significantly limited scope. The Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania stipulates that the President participates in establishing law as early as at the stage of the legislative initiative, and also at the promulgation of the acts which is related to the obligation to sign and promulgate the act, respectively to refer it back to the Seimas in order to have it reconsidered (a veto). Particular constitutional regulations related to those institutions, and also the doubts that may arise or have arisen due to those laws, have been presented in this paper. The regulations of other acts and laws in force have been also described in the paper regarding determining the rights that the President may exercise in relation to his or her competences in legislative procedure. Due to the separateness of the basic law regulations, the issues related to the President’s participation in the change or amendment of the Constitution have been discussed severally.
PL
On the Polish National and Territorial Autonomy in Lithuania (the Spring–Summer of 1991)A new system of Polish-Lithuanian relations was shaped manly by the passivity of Poles inhabiting the eastern Lithuania in the plebiscite organised by the Lithuanian government on 9 February 1991, and a decision of the authorities of Vilnius and Šalčininkai (Polish: Sołeczniki) regions to hold a referendum, initiated by Mikhail Gorbachev, on the future of the Soviet Union to turn it into a new, loose confederation of states, which was not recognized by the Lithuanian authorities. Such an attitude of Lithuanian Poles was determined by several factors. Firstly, the Soviet social and economic structure; secondly, for a large part of people the old governments of the Vilnius and Šalčininkai districts and the memory of the Lithuanian Soviet Socialist Republic guaranteed stability and predictability. The soviet structures were more trusted than a newly introduced, not strong yet Lithuanian social and political order. The sense of threat was intensified by an unquestionable domination of Lithuanians on all levels of the new hierarchy. Social and political reforms were perceived by the Polish minority in Lithuania through the prism of a rule of the majority. For the rest of the Lithuanian society (except of the Russian minority) such an attitude was completely incomprehensible. In such complex geopolitical circumstances Poles from the regions of Vilnius and Šalčininkai decided to convene a congress of deputies of the Vilnius and Šalčininkai regions to Mostiškės. According to a project adopted at the Congress, the Vilnius district was to become “an autonomous administrative-territorial unit within the Lithuanian Republic”, with a broad political autonomy. In the opinion of Lithuanians, however, the region of Vilnius should not be “an autonomous administrative-territorial unit of the Lithuanian State”, but form a part of Lithuanian federation. This meant that the Poles wanted to enlarge the status of the Vilnius region and to strengthen its autonomy within Lithuania. The implementation of such a project would mean a decentralisation of the state. In a complex geopolitical situation of that time all attempts at the decentralisation of the country was regarded by the Lithuanian political elite as the threat of the security of the young Lithuanian state, its sovereignty and territorial integrity. О польской национально-территориальной автономии в Литве (весна-лето 1991 г.)Пассивность поляков, живших в Восточной Литве, в плебисците, организованном литовскими властями 9 февраля 1991 и решение властей Виленского и Солечницкого районов организовать референдум о преобразовании Советского Союза в новую, более свободную конфедерацию, объявленный Горбачевым и признанный литовскими властями нелегальным, формировал новый контекст для польско-литовских отношений. Причины такой позиции литовских поляков были предопределены несколькими обстоятельствами. Во-первых, старой, советской общественно-экономической структурой. Во-вторых, прежними властями Виленского и Солечницкого районов, а также памятью о Литовской ССР, которые для значительной части жителей гарантировали стабильность и предсказуемость. Советские структуры вызывали больше доверия, чем новый, еще не укрепленный, литовский общественный и политический строй. Дополнительно, чувство опасности среди жителей усиливалось из-за подавляющего преобладания литовцев на всех уровнях новой власти. Общественно-политические реформы оценивались представителями польского меньшинства сквозь призму господства большинства. В настолько сложном геополитическом положении поляки из Виленского и Солечницкого районов решились на созыв съезда депутатов в Мостишках. Согласно, принятому на съезде проекту статус Виленского края был определен как «автономная административно-территориальная единица в составе Литовской Республики”. Для нее предусматривалась широкая политическая автономия. В итерпретации литовцев, Виленский край таким образом становился не столько автономной административнотерриториальной единицей литовского государства, а «государственной единицей” соединенной федеративными узами с Литвой. Можно делать вывод, что целью поляков являлось расширение статуса Виленского края и укрепление его автономии по отношению к центральным властям. Осуществление такого проекта означало децентрализацию Литвы. В сложных геополитических условиях этого периода литовские политические элиты истолковывали попытки децентрализации страны как угрозу безопасности молодого литовского государства, его суверенитета и территориальной целостности.
EN
The article presented here is a biographical sketch of a Polish landowner settled in Lithuania between 1914 and 1945 – Władysław Bichniewicz, a great-grandson of Fryderyk Chopin’s eldest sister, Ludwika Jędrzejewicz. Bichniewicz first administered and later became the owner of a landed estate in Poniemuniek (Lith. Panemunėlis). Due to the occupation of the Lithuanian state by the Red Army, he had to leave his estate.
PL
Prezentowany artykuł jest szkicem biograficznym polskiego ziemianina osiadłego na Litwie w latach 1914–1945 – Władysława Bichniewicza, prawnuka najstarszej siostry Fryderyka Chopina, Ludwiki Jędrzejewiczowej. Bichniewicz najpierw administrował, a później stał się właścicielem majątku ziemskiego w Poniemuńku. Z powodu zajęcia państwa litewskiego przez Armię Czerwoną musiał opuścić swoje gospodarstwo.
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.