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

Results found: 6

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  division of powers
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

КЛЮЧОВІ ІДЕЇ КОНСТИТУЦІОНАЛІЗМУ Й ДЕРЖАВНО-ПРАВОВИЙ РОЗВИТОК УКРАЇНИ В ПЕРІОД НАЦІОНАЛЬНО-ВИЗВОЛЬНИХ ЗМАГАНЬ 1917-1921 РОКІВ

100%
Shapoval V.
Міжнародні зв’язки України: наукові пошуки і знахідки
|
2017
|
issue 26
EN
The article describes the ideas of people's sovereignty and division of powers, which are the foundation of world constitutionalism as a historical phenomenon. The author analyzes the evolution of the notions of popular sovereignty and distribution of powers, as well as the factors that determine their relevance with regard to modern social practices in different countries, primarily in Ukraine. In the context of the concept of popular sovereignty, the article explores interpretations of the people, including legal, as well as the content and nature of the people's right to uprising even against formally legitimate rulers who usurped power and abuses it. In line with the concept of the division of powers, the main forms of government are considered. It is emphasized that the form of government, which was adopted in Ukraine in the early 90's, is merely a simulation of the corresponding forms. The article examines the reception of the ideas of national sovereignty and distribution of powers by the authors of the program documents of Ukrainian political parties at the beginning of the XX century, as well as constitutional projects and acts of constitutional significance, promulgated and approved during the national liberation movement of 1917-1921. The author notes that explicit authoritarianism in the organization and implementation of power and some formal features of parliamentary government or the intention to implement it for objective reasons often combined in this period
2
Content available remote

Legislatywa i egzekutywa w prezydenckich i półprezydenckich systemach rządów

100%
Szymanek J.
Przegląd Sejmowy
|
2017
|
issue 1(138)
103– 136
EN
The article deals with the issue of the relationship between the legislative and the executive powers under the presidential and semi-presidential systems of government. The starting point is the following general remark. While the presidential system is characterized by a consistent or complete separation of powers, the semi-presidential system — being typically mixed with a parliamentary system — treats the principle of division of powers in a less restrictive way, allowing — just like a parliamentary system — various kinds of exceptions to the rigid separation of powers. Consequently, in both of these systems the relationships between the legislature and the executive are arranged somewhat differently. Under the presidential system these relationships are kept to a minimum, and the collision between the legislature and the executive occurs episodically and mainly in the context of competition between them, whereas under the semi-presidential system various kinds of contacts between the legislative and the executive are acceptable and more frequent. While the presidential system is generated by competition between powers, the semi-presidential (and parliamentary) systems is based on the idea of cooperation of powers. Thus, under the general idea of cooperation the legislature and the executive much more likely enter into various kinds of arrangements (eg. a legislative initiative of the government, the procedure for holding the government politically responsible). It should, however, be noted that both described systems of government in its pure form are rare. Clear presidential system is in fact the political system of the United States, while the proper semi-presidential system exists in the French Fifth Republic. All other systems, conventionally classifi ed as one or the other category, are in fact more or less departure from them and rather form a wide range of neo-presidential or para-presidential regimes.
3
Content available remote

Podział władzy w Konstytucji RP z 1997 roku. Analiza formalna

86%
Małajny R. M.
Przegląd Sejmowy
|
2017
|
issue 6(143)
97–123
EN
The author fi rst builds the theoretical framework of the principle of division of powers, which consists of the following standards: A. Division between the legal spheres of state activity. B. Separation of the state apparatus into the corresponding organ groups (minimum two) according to the division of spheres, C. Relations between these organs are based on the principle of independence and equality. D. Individual groups of organs mutually check each other, and the use of these checks will result in both a relative balance and cooperation between them. E. Each group of organs is mostly engaged in its own legal sphere of activity and has a relatively limited ability to intervene in the activities of other groups. Then, the author compares these canons to the relevant provisions of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland of 1997. As a result, he concludes that it is not possible to strictly separate the legislative and executive sphere of activity of the state and the complete exclusiveness of operation of an organ in its sphere. Moreover, it is not possible to perfectly balance the mutual infl uence of individual organs. The above listed canons of the division of powers thus function in the parliamentary system mainly as an ideal theoretical construction. Nevertheless, at least the essential part of them is provided.
4
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Precedent and United States Administrative Law

72%
Edmundson W. A.
Studia Iuridica Lublinensia
|
2018
|
vol. 27
|
issue 1
EN
In the common law order, precedent is not only a matter of applying law but also of making law. The crucial function of stare decisis is to relieve the appearance of judicial arbitrariness. Precedent also applies in the domain of administrative law in the context of judicial control of administrative policy making. Federal courts treat administrative agencies as having precedent-setting powers comparable to their own, under what is referred to as the Chevron doctrine. This doctrine determines the scope of judicial control of the decisional process performed by an administrative agency, particularly when the court is called upon to enforce a limitation to the administrative discretion delegated by the agency’s governing statute.
PL
Precedens w porządku common law jest nie tylko elementem stosowania, ale też środkiem tworzenia prawa, niezależnie od trudności, jakie w tym kontekście płyną z zasady podziału władz. Decydujące znaczenie dla przyjęcia tej tezy ma ograniczenie arbitralności sędziowskiej, wynikające z formuły stare decisis, wpływającej na konkretny proces decyzyjny. Dotyczy to także stosowania prawa administracyjnego w kontekście sądowej kontroli działań administracji. W jej ramach sądy posługują się precedensami w sposób, który jest określony jako doktryna Chevron, określająca zakres sądowej kontroli procesu wykładni dokonanej przez organ administracyjny, zwłaszcza w sytuacji konieczności limitowania swobody administracyjnej wykreowanej przez ustawę.
5
Content available remote

Idea pomocniczości w myśli Władysława Piwowarskiego

72%
Hartman B. E.
Roczniki Nauk Społecznych
|
2019
|
vol. 11(47)
|
issue 3
43-78
PL
W artykule podejmuje się próbę przedstawienia dorobku badawczego ks.Władysława Piwowarskiego pod względem rozwoju jego oryginalnych, prekursorskich i pielęgnowanych przez prawie 40 lat przemyśleń dotyczących idei pomocniczości. Oryginalność jego prac dotyczących tej idei wynika z kilku istotnych powodów. Są to bowiem badania, które podejmował jako pierwszy z filozofów w Polsce, i które kontynuował oprócz innych, socjologicznych, aż do końca swej drogi naukowej. Reprezentował w nich śmiało nowy trend w katolickiej nauce społecznej, czyli propagowanie idei społeczeństwa obywatelskiego. Ideę subsydiarności adresował do szeroko pojmowanego społeczeństwa.
EN
The article will attempt to present the research achievements of Father Władysław Piwowarski in terms of the development of his original, pioneering and reflections on the idea of subsidiarity cultivated for almost 40 years. The originality of his work on this idea is due to several important reasons. These are the studies that he undertook as the first philosopher in Poland, and which he continued, apart from other sociological ones, until the end of his scientific career. He boldly represented a new trend in Catholic social teaching, that is, the promotion of the idea of civil society. He addressed the idea of subsidiarity to the broadly understood society.
6
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Hungarian understanding of the division of powers

58%
Halász I., Grabowski R.
Przegląd Prawa Konstytucyjnego
|
2016
|
issue 6 (34)
59-78
EN
Hungarian constitutional system has a number of characteristics, including division of power. This is a result atypical evolution of the political system in Hungary after 1989. Most of the countries of Central and Eastern made a thorough reconstruction of the political system in the nineties of the twentieth century, many constitutions were adopted in 1991–1994. Otherwise had done Hungarians, making a 1989 amendment to the Constitution of 1949. and the adoption of a new constitution putting off indefinitely. Completely new Fundamental Law was adopted only in 2011., in force since 1 January 2012. It introduced in the Hungarian constitutional system significant changes, modifying the way the principle the division of powers. The changes seem to be rational, and therefore to be expected that the Hungarian model finds followers.
PL
System konstytucyjny Węgier posiada szereg cech charakterystycznych, także jeśli chodzi o podział władzy. Jest to skutkiem nietypowego przebiegu ewolucji ustroju, jaką przechodziły Węgry po 1989 r. Większość państw Europy Środkowo-wschodniej dokonało gruntownej przebudowy systemu politycznego w latach dziewięćdziesiątych XX w., liczne konstytucje były uchwalane w latach 1991–1994. Inaczej postąpili Węgrzy, dokonując w 1989 nowelizacji Konstytucji z 1949 r., a uchwalenie nowej konstytucji odkładając na bliżej nieokreśloną przyszłość. Zupełnie nowa Ustawa Zasadnicza została uchwalona dopiero w 2011 r., obowiązuje od 1 stycznia 2012 r. Wprowadziła ona w węgierskim systemie konstytucyjnym istotne zmiany, modyfikując także sposób realizacji zasady podziału władz. Przeprowadzone zmiany wydają się jednak racjonalne, a zatem należy się spodziewać, że model węgierski znajdzie naśladowców.
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.