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:  parliamentary procedure
help Sort By:

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

The Influence of Ethnic Power Sharing Mechanisms on the Functioning of Parliaments in the Western Balkans

100%
Szabó Z.
Central European Papers
|
2016
|
vol. 4
|
issue 1
50-62
EN
The Western Balkans countries, yet differ in religious and ethnic background, their present-day constitutional setup – at least on paper - has plenty of similarities. Each of them has a parliamentary form of government, a proportional voting system, and a rather ceremonial head of state. Most of these countries have also a predominantly complex ethnic landscape. After the armed ethnic conflicts of the 1990s and 2000s, the region set out along constitutional consolidation. As a price of the peace, various ethnic-based power-sharing methods were introduced in the constitutional systems of the countries. However, this pa- per argues that any political regime based on such instruments – one that gives preference to the interests of certain ethnic groups – can only be built to the detriment of a democratic state. As a result of ethnic way of thinking, the political landscape is dominated by (mostly ethnic oriented) parties and effective decision-making procedures are often missing or neglected. Parliamentary activities are often held on a minimum scale, being based on obligatory tasks, a proactive manner (scrutiny, control of the government) is missing.
2
Content available remote

The role of parliamentary autonomy in constitutional review

100%
Wintr J., Chmel J., Askari D.
The Lawyer Quarterly
|
2021
|
vol. 11
|
issue 1
83-103
EN
The article deals with the principle of parliamentary autonomy and the role it plays in decisions of courts carrying out constitutional review. The principles and interests competing with parliamentary autonomy are categorized and analysed against the backdrop of relevant case-law, offering a wide scale of approaches used by courts around the world. Three groups of competing interests are analysed separately: (i) public control of parliaments, (ii) the principle of representation and (iii) the rights of parliamentary opposition and individual members of parliament. Within the analysis, examples of good practice as well as those of unpersuasive approaches are offered. Subsequently, the article offers general doctrinal principles, the observance of which would help ensure that courts do not overreach in regulating parliamentary internal affairs, thus triggering unwanted consequences.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Opinia prawna w sprawie odmowy zwołania wspólnego posiedzenia komisji sejmowych

100%
Gierach E.
Zeszyty Prawnicze BAS
|
2012
|
issue 2(34)
55-60
EN
Joint committee meetings are a form of cooperation between two separate bodies of the Sejm. In accordance with Article 163 Paragraph 1 of the Standing Orders of the Sejm of the Republic of Poland, the joint meetings are chaired by one of the chairmen of committees. If a consensus on the issues of determining the guest list and indicating a chairperson cannot be reached, the Rules of Parliamentary procedure contain points preventing the effective block of the work of parliamentary committees.
4
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Resumption of Voting in the Sejm - A Few Remarks

88%
Pastuszko G.
Przegląd Prawa Konstytucyjnego
|
2020
|
issue 6 (58)
127-137
EN
The article is entirely devoted to the issue of adopting the resumption of voting in the Sejm of the Republic of Poland. It concerns all the aspects of this institution, starting with genesis, through its systemic ratio legis, and ending with the material premises and the procedural mechanism of its application. The main goal is to analyze the normative content of the legal solutions in force in this area and, at the same time, to present selected experiences of political system practice. Focusing on these elements, the author answers the question of necessity of establishing the Article 189 of the Standing Orders of the Sejm, as well as the limits of using the institution of resumption in parliamentary practice. These efforts are accompanied by in-depth reflection on what should be changed in the content of the mentioned provision in order to make resumption an even more effective tool for verifying parliamentary votes.
PL
Niniejszy artykuł poświęcony jest w całości problematyce uchwalania reasumpcji głosowania w Sejmie RP. Zawarty w nim wywód dotyczy wszystkich aspektów tej instytucji, począwszy od genezy, poprzez jej ustrojowe ratio legis, a skończywszy na materialnych przesłankach i proceduralnym mechanizmie jej stosowania. Zasadniczy cel stanowi tutaj poddanie analizie normatywnego kształtu obowiązujących w tym zakresie rozwiązań prawnych i jednocześnie ukazanie wybranych doświadczeń praktyki ustrojowej. Koncentrując się na tych elementach, autor próbuje udzielić odpowiedzi na pytanie o zasadność ustanowienia normującego tę materię art. 189 regulaminu Sejmu a także o granice korzystania z instytucji reasumpcji w praktyce parlamentarnej. Podjętemu wysiłkowi badawczemu towarzyszy pogłębiona refleksja nad tym, co należałoby zmienić w treści wskazanego przepisu, tak by uczynić reasumpcję jeszcze bardziej efektywnym narzędziem służącym weryfikowaniu sejmowych głosowań.
5
Content available remote

Pozaustawodawcze procedury parlamentarne w pierwszym sejmie odrodzonej Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej (1919–1922). Regulacja prawna i praktyka parlamentarna

51%
Tusiński P. A.
Przegląd Sejmowy
|
2019
|
issue 2(151)
123–156
EN
The first Sejm of the Renascent Republic of Poland — the Legislative Sejm — performed not only the legislative function, but also other systemic functions: oversight over the executive, creative function and the function of the guardian of Deputies’ immunity. In order to perform those functions, the chamber applied various detailed parliamentary procedures — variants of the so-called motion proceedings. The sources of law of these procedures contained norms rudimentarily included in the Small Constitution of 20 February 1919 and principally, in the Standing Orders of the Sejm, although there predominated legal-customary norms, partially implemented from Western European parliamentarism, and partially established domestically, on the basis of parliamentary practice. The majority of extra-legislative procedures and proceedings commenced on their basis, were those within the oversight function of the Sejm (including proceedings related to government investments, interpellations and proceedings involving investigative committees), and further, proceedings related to immunity, including mostly proceedings in matters to express the chamber’s consent to waive a Deputy’s immunity and interventions related to infringement of a Deputy’s immunity by organs of administration. The proceedings established by the Legislative Sejm in relation to immunity proceedings, in the scope of bringing Deputies to extra-immunity accountability, applied eight times before the intra-chamber peer courts — Marshal’s Court and Court of Honour — were an originality in all of the European parliamentarism of the time.
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.