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

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  second chamber
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Modele przedstawicielstwa w izbie drugiej parlamentu

100%
Szymanek J.
Przegląd Sejmowy
|
2013
|
issue 3(116)
9-23
EN
The question of existence or non-existence of a second chamber comes down to the problem of representativeness. The dispute about the sense of keeping the upper chamber is in fact a dispute about whom it has ultimately to represent. If we assume that the second chamber should be, to the extent as the first chamber, a nationwide representation forum, the question arises: what for we have to duplicate the mirror-image of representation, and create the same representation in the first and in the second chamber? However, an assumption of a different model of representation also undermines the sense of the existence of the second chamber, if it is to be different from the first chamber regarded as a model for parliamentary chambers. Nevertheless, it is recognized that the second chamber must provide a different profile of representation, if it is to exist at all. But the question is: What should it be? Here, the doctrine and practice may offer some solutions. The first is the federal representation model in which the second chamber is a platform for the expression of the interests of the non-unitary state entities. The second is a model of regional chambers, i.e. those functioning on a unitary state, where individual territories are given a considerable degree of autonomy. The third model is the chamber or local self-government, designed as a representative of interests of municipalities and local communities. Another model is that of the chamber of corporations, based on the representation of socio-occupational interests. Regardless of which model is adopted, it should be noted that the sense of the existence of the second chamber is determined by a different form of representation. The second chamber must always be the second one, which also means that it must be different in terms of representation as compared to the first chamber.
2
Content available remote

Słowenia: ustawa o Radzie Państwa Republiki Słowenii z 10 września 1992 r.

100%
Pogłódek A.
Przegląd Sejmowy
|
2019
|
issue 4(153)
171–186
EN
The translated text in the Slovenian act on the National Council of 10 September 1992. The second chamber of the parliament was established in accordance with the Slovenian Constitution of 23 December 1991. Such concept of the second chamber resulted from the tradition of corporative representation, the existence of the three-chamber Skupstina in the People’s Republic of Slovenia, as well as the model of a second chamber of this kind, functioning in Bavaria at the time and still functioning in Ireland. The Slovenian second chamber is therefore one of the few upper chambers elected on the basis of functional representation. It is the representation of social, economic, professional and local interests. With the National Assembly, the chamber participates in exercising the legislative power; it may also, i.a., submit a motion for the appointment of an investigative committee or holding a referendum – a motion binding for the National Assembly. It is also vested with limited oversight competences of the executive. The act contains mostly regulations on the manner of electing the National Council, its internal organization and the status of its members. The act also regulates matters related to the works of the National Council.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Senat Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej - izba druga czy izba drugoplanowa?

72%
Grabowski R.
Przegląd Prawa Konstytucyjnego
|
2021
|
issue 4 (62)
449-459
EN
The Polish model of bicameralism assumes the lack of symmetry between the chambers. Certainly, a stronger position in the procedure of adopting laws can be attributed to the Sejm (first chamber), and a weaker position to the Senate (second chamber). An analogous domination of the Sejm cannot be discussed in the case of changes to the constitution, ratification of international agreements, or the election to perform state functions indicated in the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. It should be noted that the relations between the chambers of the Polish parliament are subject to changes. The actual relations between the first and second chambers depend to a large extent on the currently binding provisions of the electoral law, the results of the elections based on them, and the formation of a certain majority in the Sejm and Senate.
PL
Polski model dwuizbowości zakłada brak symetrii pomiędzy izbami. Z całą pewnością silniejszą pozycję w procedurze uchwalania ustaw można przypisać Sejmowi (izba pierwsza), słabszą natomiast Senatowi (izba druga). O analogicznej dominacji Sejmu nie można mówić w przypadku zmiany konstytucji, ratyfikowania umów międzynarodowych, czy wyborze do pełnienia wskazanych w Konstytucji RP funkcji państwowych. Należy zwrócić uwagę na fakt, że relacje pomiędzy izbami polskiego parlamentu podlegają zmianom. Faktyczne relacje pomiędzy izbą pierwszą a izbą drugą zależą w dużej mierze od aktualnie obowiązujących przepisów prawa wyborczego, wyników przeprowadzonych w oparciu o nie wyborów, a także ukształtowaniu się określonej większości w Sejmie i w Senacie.
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.