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

Results found: 50

first rewind previous Page / 3 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  mandate
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 3 next fast forward last
EN
The author attempts to resolve the issue of the admissibility of the extension of parliamentary immunity to include disciplinary (professional) responsibility of the Deputy for actions taken in connection with the exercise of the mandate. He claims that material immunity (non‑liability) enshrined in the Constitution and developed by the Act on the Exercise of the Mandate of a Deputy or Senator, also applies to the professional activity of the Deputy, provided that such activities fall within the “scope of the mandate”, as referred to in Article 105 of the Constitution. In the conclusion, he stresses that the Deputy being at the same time an advocate accounts to the Sejm for the activities falling within the scope of the mandate.
EN
The author claims that there are no legal obstacles for a Deputy to incidentally fulfill his duties out-of-parliament by using, for this purpose, vehicles such as a bus. However, that sort of activity hast to stay within the limits of exercising a parliamentary mandate and, thus, stay within the scope of functioning of a Deputy’s office. As the Marshal’s of the Sejm Order No. 8 states, an enumeration of probable expenses which may be covered in lump sum to cover costs related to the functioning of a Deputy’s office, is only of an exemplary character. Such sort of costs might be covered from the above-mentioned source only when they concern “Deputy’s transport”. The author underlines that a Deputy does not have an obligation to use a bus which is a property of Deputy’s office. The Deputy may also use a vehicle provided for use by volunteers or by a non-governmental organization. That kind of activity ought to stay within limits of exercising of the mandate of a Deputy and ought not to be used for the purposes of sponsorship.
EN
The opinion relates to the use of the term “occasional “ in the context of provision of office space to a Deputy for meetings with voters. This cannot apply to fixed, regular meetings of a Member of Parliament with voters, but only occasional, irregular work on duty. Even if governmental or local administration authorities are obliged to provide premises for the duration of such occasional work, the way (form) in which such premises are provided is at the discretion of these authorities, which means possibility – but not a necessity – to provide office space without charge.
EN
According to the author, the provisions of the Act on the Exercise of the Mandate of a Deputy or Senator leave no doubt that in the case of Deputies who have received the seat during the term of the Sejm, the rule on the suspension of criminal proceedings applies only to criminal proceedings initiated before date of assuming the seat, i.e. prior to the day of publication in Monitor Polski of the order of the Marshal of the Sejm concerning filling of the mandate. As indicated in the opinion, a Deputy, against whom criminal proceedings has been instituted before the day of his/her election, may apply to the Sejm with a request for suspension of criminal proceedings until the expiry of the mandate.
EN
A Deputy, after the expiry of the mandate, is still entitled to legal protection based on art. 105 paragraph 1 sentence 2 of the Constitution. This means that even after the expiry of the mandate, the Deputy may be prosecuted for an act violating the rights of third parties upon the consent of the Sejm. The Sejm is obliged to examine the application for permission to hold Deputy responsible for the activities within the scope of the mandate (to waive the immunity of a Deputy), whose mandate has expired, provided that the application complies with the formal requirements described in the Act on Exercise of the Mandate of a Deputy and Senator.
EN
The subject of the opinion is the issue, whether a Deputy as a natural person could process personal data and whether processing the data must be notified to the Inspector General for Personal Data Protection. The author claims that parliamentary activities might involve processing personal data. However, in most situations the possibility of processing of sensitive data by a Deputy must be excluded. The duty to register a set of personal data concerns these Deputies who process such data under statutory rules beyond indicated exceptions.
EN
The opinion concerns formation of the new Deputies’ Club of the Polish People’s Party and the Union of European Democrats composed of Deputies from different political parties. The principle, which implies that these independent parties retain their organisational and programmatic difference, is politically binding for the new club and it is not contrary to the Standing Orders of the Sejm or other acts. Deputies’, Senate and parliamentary associations may be only composed of Deputies and Senators, thus the provision of club’s rules of procedure which states that Members of the European Parliament (chosen from the Polish People’s Party’s list) could be members of the Deputies’ Club of the Polish People’s Party and the Union of European Democrats, does not conform to binding legal provisions
EN
The Act on the Exercise of the Mandate of a Deputy or Senator constitutes legal basis for requiring by the Deputy the access to recordings from the session of a communal council. However, there are no sanctions in case of local self-government unit’s infringement of such an obligation towards Deputies and Senators. The lack of specific legal instruments does not exclude the possibility of taking action on general terms, i.e. on the basis of provisions concerning control and supervision over local self-government. A Deputy may demand, from the chairperson of the council, an explanation of reasons for the inability of the realization of such right.
EN
The institution of intervention was constructed in the Act on the Exercise of the Exercise of a Mandate of a Deputy or Senator in a relatively inaccurate way. The author of the opinion states that in the analyzed situation a Deputy is not entitled to participate in the inspection carried out by the County’s Inspectorate of Construction Supervision. The only legal requirements concerning the intervention concern informing the Deputy about the state of consideration the case, being the subject of the intervention, and defining the date of “the final consideration of the case”.
EN
In the opinion of the expert, a Deputy is not an employee and his/her function cannot be treated as a managerial or independent position within the meaning of labour law. Parliamentary salary is not a remuneration for work, and employment of Deputies and Senators does not take place within the scope of an employment relationship. It is a special type of employment called a “systemic” or “constitutional“ one.
EN
Membership of a Deputy in the parliamentary team is not considered a type of service or work the pursuit of which requires access to classified information. This is due to the fact that the parliamentary teams are established in order to promote certain values and attitudes, and serve to achieve cross‑party public purposes. The author explains that the exercise of a Deputy’s mandate may require the use of classified information, but each time is it a consequence of the Sejm’s decision.
EN
Sending out holiday greetings by regular mail does not involve the exercise of rights and duties of Deputies, also within a broad meaning of this term, and could not be recognized as an activity aimed at the creation of an organizational framework for the exercise of the mandate. Therefore, it cannot be classified as the exercise of a Deputy’s mandate, or activity substantially connected with the performance of the function of a Member of Parliament. In the author’s opinion, holiday greeting cards cannot be distributed by Deputies with the use of postage-paid envelopes provided by the Sejm.
EN
The author provided an assessment of the duties of the Chancellery of the Sejm in relation to provision of information to the public on request. Following an analysis of the provisions of the Act on Access to Public Information, she states that the Chancellery of the Sejm has an obligation to provide, under the procedure for disclosure of publicly accessible information, the information about the names of locations and hotels, in which accommodation of the Deputies were funded by the Chancellery of the Sejm. It is also required – upon request of the person concerned – to provide insights into invoices or receipts documenting Deputy’s stay in a hotel or to prepare and hand out photocopies of these documents.
EN
According to the current state of law, a Deputy who is not a member of supervisory boards and programme boards of public broadcasters is not entitled to attend meetings of these bodies, even as an observer. Deputies may, however, in the exercise of their parliamentary mandate, have access to minutes documenting meetings of such bodies. Providing a parliamentarian with such documents is conditional, as it cannot infringe on personal rights of others, as well as on provisions concerning statutorily protected secrets.
EN
In the opinion of the author, a Deputy may obtain access to information on land and mortgage register numbers from a local government unit pursuant to the provision of the Act on the Exercise of the Mandate of a Deputy or Senator. However, s/he is not exempted from the obligation to pay the fee provided for in the provisions of the geodetic and cartographic law. Costs related to this expense should be paid from the parliamentary allowance to which the Deputy is entitled to cover expenses incurred in the exercise of his or her parliamentary mandate.
EN
A Deputy may not obtain information from the National Labour Inspectorate under Article 19 of the Act on the Exercise of the Mandate of a Deputy or Senator. However, he or she may exercise the right to obtain information or explanations from representatives of the relevant state and local government bodies and institutions pursuant to Article 16 of the above Act. It is also possible to use the right of access to public information to obtain information about the activities of the National Labour Inspectorate.
EN
Under the law, in relation to expiry of the mandate a parliamentarian is entitled to a severance pay in the amount of three salaries. The right does not apply to a Deputy or Senator who has been elected for the next term or who has resigned. A Deputy retains the right to the allowance also in a situation where he/she does not take advantage of an unpaid leave and does not possess the status of the so-called professional MP. The protection of the durability of the employment relationship, based on Article 31 para. 2 of the Act, covers only Deputies who took on unpaid leave due to the performance of their mandate.
EN
A Deputy does not have to inform the Marshal of the Sejm about an intention of being employed as an assistant professor in a higher education institution, because it is a creative activity of an individual nature. Such obligation would exist if a Deputy had to perform additional responsibilities (apart from a pure academic or didactic work). In such case a Deputy would lose the right to receive a salary. However, s/he could apply for a partial salary – in the sum equal to the difference between a full Deputy’s salary and an additional one (received as a result of an additional employment).
EN
The article deals with the problem of non-contract private building management by communes. The situation, however, generates conflicts over the administration between the buildings' owners and the communes. In the firs place, the author of the article discusses the legal regulations binding in the period of the People's Republic of Poland, witch caused numerous properties, particularly privately-owned buildings, to remain in the possession of communes. In order to assess the legal relation between the commune and property owners, the provisions of Articles 752-757 of the Polish Civil Code, witch concern management of another person's affairs without mandate (negotiorum gestio) are applied. On the ground of this regulation, the author examines the rights and duties of the commune managing private buildings and its responsibility against owners of properties. He also discusses the question of binding property owners to contracts made by the commune. Frequently, the property managed by communes has unregulated legal status, which hinders their return to the righteous owners. In consequence, communes are forced to manage the property. Therefore, the author shows the legal basis of the commune's claim for taking over the management of buildings by their legal owners.
EN
In the opinion of the author, there are no obstacles to combine the mandate of a Deputy with the status of a limited partner in a limited partnership, in case, in addition to the Deputy the company is to include another limited partner (natural person) and the limited liability company as a general partner, and in a limited liability company the Deputy will neither be a partner, nor will perform any functions related to decision making, and such a limited partnership will be represented only by the general partner.
first rewind previous Page / 3 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.