Search results

1

Interpretation of the Right to an Effective Remedy in Freedom of Expression Cases in the Light of the Rule of Law Principle

100%

Milašiūtė V.

Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Społecznej

|

2022

|

issue 2(31)

7-21

PL

Artykuł koncentruje się na ochronie wolności słowa sędziów i prokuratorów, którzy korzystają z tej wolności w ramach swoich obowiązków zawodowych, aby promować rządy prawa, co niekiedy naraża ich na negatywne konsekwencje. Wychodząc od analizy wyroku ETPC w sprawie Kövesi v. Rumunia omówiono m.in. kwestie charakteru i wymogów jakościowych środka odwoławczego. ETPC wymaga skutecznych środków prawnych w tym zakresie, ale nie wyklucza jednoznacznie możliwości stosowania środków pozasądowych. UE z kolei wymaga stosowania sądowych środków odwoławczych, chyba że istnieją szczególne, oparte na prawie UE powody, które uzasadniają możliwość skorzystania z pozasądowego środka odwoławczego. Argumenty teoretyczne oparte na materialnej koncepcji państwa prawa przemawiają za koniecznością stosowania sądowego środka odwoławczego. Opracowanie stanowi uzupełnienie badań nad niezawisłością sędziowską w świetle zasady rządów prawa. Łączy analizę dorobku ETPC, regulacji prawa UE oraz perspektywę teoretyczną.

EN

The paper focuses on the protection of freedom of expression of judges and prosecutors who exercise this freedom in their professional capacity to promote the rule of law, but suffer negative consequences as a result. Starting with the ECtHR Kövesi v. Romania judgment, the issues of whether legal remedy, in this context, should necessarily be judicial and what quality requirements it should meet are analysed. The paper finds that the ECtHR requires effective remedies in this field, but does not clearly exclude a possibility of non judicial remedies. The EU law, on the other hand, requires judicial remedies unless there are very limited EU law-based reasons (notably, constitutional identity arguments) that justify a possibility of a non-judicial remedy. Theoretical arguments based on substantive conception of the rule of law support the need for a judicial remedy. The study is an addition to the research into judicial independence in the light of the rule of law. It connects the ECtHR, EU law and theoretical perspectives.

2

Porozumienia karnoprocesowe w polskim procesie karnym w opinii sędziów i prokuratorów

85%

Światłowski A. R.

Archiwum Kryminologii

|

2000

|

issue XXV

141-177

EN

Over the recent dozen years, there have been attempts in the criminal procedure doctrine at considerably re-formulating the airns of proceedings. It has been noticed, among other things, that the criminal process should not only tulfil substantive law. It has other aims as well that are just as important, including first and foremost liquidation of the specific “conflict” resulting from perpetration of an offence. This led to formulation of “post-classical” theories of the criminal process, stressing the consensual forms of conflict resolution that have been known since the birth of societies. Criticized was the assumption that the process seen as an instrument for fulfilling substantive law is in all cases the best form of conflict resolution and the best manner of legitimizing decisions of the agencies that apply the law (N. Luhmann, L. Morawski, T. Weigend, S. Waltoś). Consensual phenomena naturally arouse interest; they have become the topic of discussions. The real reason of such discussions is, among other things, a growing awareness of the poor efficiency of criminal justice: the disproportion of the means that can be used to fight crime to the actual needs in this respect. Already early in the nineties, the findings of a survey carried out within the Adam Mickiewicz University (A.J. Szwarc, J. Sobczak) demonstrated that agreements are alien to the Polish practice. The practice's opinion on that phenomenon varied in the survey: parallel to criticism, serious arguments were voiced for a broader use of agreements. This demonstrated the need for continued scientific discussion of the issue. The initial stage of that discussion was recapitulated at a conference held in June 1992 in Poznań. The conference provided the opportunity for the first direct confrontation of doctrine’s views. Several years later, a survey into formal and informal agreements was carried out within the Criminal Procedure Department of Jagellonian University (A. Światłowski). That survey also confirmed the existence in ptactice of a great variety of agreements, and the practice’s views proved just as diversified. The survey inquired about: 1) the actual extent of agreements, or at least that declared by the circles involved; 2) the appraisal of agreements by some of the legal professions; 3) the possible postulates de lege ferenda voiced on the eve of introduction of new codification, especially with respect to the future formalization of some forms of adjustments made in the criminal process, and to suggested new regulations. The survey was divided into three parts: a pilot survey, interviews, and a mail questionnaire. Upon completion of the pilot survey, the stage of interviews started. Interviewed were judges of common courts and prosecutors public prosecutor’s offices, three from each unit selected for the sample. To secure a possibly even distribution of units, the country was conventionally divided into four areas. Within each area, one court of appeal, one provincial court, and two district courts were selected: one of them operating in a big city in an urbanized area, and the other one – in a smaller locality in a rural neighborhood. A similar procedure was applied to select l2 prosecutor’s offices (one provincial and two district ones in each area). Thus the planned sample to be included in the interview survey was to include 28 units, that is up to 84 persons. Foreseeable difficulties considered, such as refusals to be interviewed or a probable situation where as many as three judges deciding in criminal cases would not be present at the same time in one court, it was assumed that about 50 persons would be interviewed (the actual number was to prove bigger: 62). Besides, selected for the mail questionnaire were 4 courts of appeal as well as 48 each of provincial and district courts and prosecutor’s offices, that is the total of 100 units. Of the 300 mailed questionnaires, 141 (47%) were sent back. The questionnaire was anonymous. The findings have been discussed in the present paper. It has to be stressed that about a half of respondents considered informal and para-formal agreements possible. As regards the incidents of such phenomena, 63 respondents of the mail questionnaire never encountered the informal and para-formal agreements; instead, 75 (53.2%) had to do with them at least once. Characteristically, none of them chose the answer, “very often”. Among the interviewed persons, 29 (46.8%) had to do with agreements, while 33 (53.2%) never encountered that phenomenon. A great variety of answers were given to the question about the stage of proceedings at which agreements are made. Mentioned here were agreemets in preparatory proceedings (and even before the institution or that proceedings), in proceedings before the 1st instance cort, and also in the appellate proceedings. Almost all respondents who declared knowledge of the practice of agreements mentioned the sentence as the basic and standard subject of agreement. Of course, also adjustments in purely technical matters were mentioned here. What seems to have been the most typical phenomenon under the former code of criminal procedure was an agreement under which, most generally speaking, the defendant admitted his guilt and did not “obstruct” his conviction in return for a more lenient treatment. Mentioned most often (by 34, that is 44.7% of respondents) as the typical initiator of criminal procedure agreement was the counsel for the defense. As regards the categories of cases in which agreements were made, mentioned were socalled “family cases”, that is abuse and failure to pay maintenance, as well as petty thefts, sometimes combined with compelling a specific conduct or with destruction of property. The fact considered that the number of respondents declaring frequent contacts with agreements was not big, more attention has been devoted in the paper to the statements of those persons, and an attempt has been made at formulating conclusions as to the features of agreements made at the time of the survey. To end with, respondents were offered the opportunity to make suggestions as to formalization of agreements in the new codification that was about to be introduced at the time of the survey. The most frequent postulates no doubt concurred with the subsequently introduced new institutions, especially with the new institution provided for in Article 387 of the code of criminal procedure.

3

Prawnicy o prawie i swojej profesji

80%

Wiktorska P.

Rocznik Towarzystwa Naukowego Płockiego

|

2016

|

vol. 8

s. 481-526

XX

Prawnicy są odpowiedzialni za kontrolę przestępczości i kontrolę przestrzegania prawa w społeczeństwie. Badania klasycznych profesji: sędziego, prokuratora i adwokata, pokazują jak postrzegają oni prawo, jakie funkcje prawa uznają za najistotniejsze oraz w jakim stopniu identyfikują się ze swoją profesją. Artykuł opisuje problemy współczesnego prawa i wynikające z tego trudności związane z pracą w zawodach prawniczych. Stanowi on, opartą o badania, refleksję nad kompetencjami w zawodach prawniczych.

EN

Lawyers are responsible for crime control and monitoring compliance with the law in society. Research of classic legal profession; judges, prosecutors, advocates shows how they understand the law, functions of the law and how they identify with their profession. This article describes problems of contemporary law and the results of this, the difficulty of working in the legal professions. This is based on research reflection on the competences of the legal profession.

4

Wznowienie i organizacja sądownictwa polskiego w Zamościu w latach 1918–1919

80%

Bereza A.

Annales Universitatis Mariae Curie-Skłodowska, sectio G (Ius)

|

2019

|

vol. 66

|

issue 1

EN

During World War I, after the evacuation of the Russian authorities, a local grassroots judiciary system was established in July 1915 in Zamość and surroundings on the initiative of local lawyers. It operated for a short period and then was disbanded by the Austrian occupation authorities. However, the courts of the lowest instance remained, bound within the instance system with the occupation administration and military courts. In Zamość, the Magistrate’s Court and the Military Regional (District) Court were functioning. Following the proclamation of the Act of 5 November of 1916 by the German and Austro-Hungarian Emperors, according to the provisions contained therein, the work aimed at handing over the judiciary in the occupied territories of the Kingdom of Poland to Polish hands was commenced. On 1 September 1917, the courts of the Kingdom of Poland were opened, including the Magistrate’s Court in Zamość. As a result of the initiative of the municipal authorities of Zamość and local social organizations, the Regency Council of the Kingdom of Poland decided to establish the District Court of the Kingdom of Poland in Zamość. It was inaugurated on 1 June 1918 with Romuald Jaśkiewicz as its President, who had previously been the justice of peace of Zamość. The court was composed of four district judges, four investigating judges and one district prosecutor and three deputy prosecutors. These positions were assumed by attorneys in law, lawyers coming from Galicia, as well as Polish lawyers who had returned from Russia torn by the civil war. Lower positions such as investigative judges were also assumed by trainee judges. In the years 1918–1919, significant rotation of personnel in these positions could be observed. The Zamość District covered four counties (in Polish: powiaty): Zamość, Biłgoraj, Hrubieszów and Tomaszów, with 19 peace courts operating in their respective areas. They comprised two magistrates’ courts in Zamość, covering the so-called municipal district and rural district. These were presided by Zygmunt Kostkiewicz and Adam Sajkiewicz. In November 1918, the courts of Zamość began to issue judgements “on behalf of the Republic of Poland”, and soon afterwards these courts were seated in the Zamoyski Palace refurbished for that purpose.

PL

W czasie I wojny światowej, w lipcu 1915 r. po ewakuacji władz rosyjskich, w Zamościu i jego okolicach z inicjatywy miejscowych prawników powstało sądownictwo obywatelskie. Funkcjonowało krótko, zostało rozwiązane przez austriackie władze okupacyjne. Utrzymano jednak sądy najniższej instancji, wiążąc je instancyjnie z organami administracji okupacyjnej i sądami wojskowymi. W Zamościu funkcjonował sąd pokoju i wojskowy sąd obwodowy (powiatowy). Po wydaniu przez władców Niemiec i Austro-Węgier aktu 5 listopada z 1916 r. zgodnie z zawartą w nim zapowiedzią przystąpiono do prac mających na celu przekazanie w polskie ręce wymiaru sprawiedliwości na okupowanych terenach Królestwa Polskiego. W dniu 1 września 1917 r. otwarto sądy królewsko-polskie, a wśród nich sąd pokoju w Zamościu. W wyniku inicjatywy władz miejskich Zamościa i lokalnych organizacji społecznych Rada Regencyjna Królestwa Polskiego podjęła decyzję o utworzeniu królewsko-polskiego Sądu Okręgowego w Zamościu. Został on uroczyście otwarty w dniu 1 czerwca 1918 r., a jego prezesem mianowano dotychczasowego zamojskiego sędziego pokoju Romualda Jaśkiewicza. W skład sądu weszło czterech sędziów okręgowych, czterech sędziów śledczych, a także prokurator okręgowy i trzech podprokuratorów. Stanowiska te objęli adwokaci, prawnicy pochodzący z Galicji oraz polscy prawnicy powracający z ogarniętej wojną domową Rosji. Niższe stanowiska (np. sędziów śledczych) obsadzane były również przez pierwszych aplikantów sądowych. W latach 1918–1919 można zaobserwować spory ruch kadrowy na tych stanowiskach. Okręg zamojski obejmował cztery powiaty: zamojski, biłgorajski, hrubieszowski i tomaszowski, z działającymi na ich obszarze 19 sądami pokoju. Wśród nich były dwa sądy pokoju w Zamościu, obejmujące tzw. okręg miejski i okręg wiejski. Na ich czele stali Zygmunt Kostkiewicz i Adam Sajkiewicz. W listopadzie 1918 r. sądy zamojskie zaczęły wydawać wyroki „w imieniu Republiki Polskiej”, a niedługo potem ich siedzibą stał się wyremontowany dla tych celów pałac Zamoyskich.

Refine search results

1 Annales Universitatis Mariae Curie-Skłodowska, sectio G (Ius)

1 Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Społecznej

1 Archiwum Kryminologii

1 Rocznik Towarzystwa Naukowego Płockiego

1 Bereza A.

1 Milašiūtė V.

1 Wiktorska P.

1 Światłowski A. R.

1 2022

1 2019

1 2016

1 2000

Interpretation of the Right to an Effective Remedy in Freedom of Expression Cases in the Light of the Rule of Law Principle

Porozumienia karnoprocesowe w polskim procesie karnym w opinii sędziów i prokuratorów

Prawnicy o prawie i swojej profesji

Wznowienie i organizacja sądownictwa polskiego w Zamościu w latach 1918–1919