The author finds the submitted proposal for amendments to be consistent with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. The above‑mentioned proposal extends the competence of the Minister of Justice in the field of supervision of administrative activity of the common courts, which is however limited to new opportunities for obtaining information of the activities of the courts, and does not breach the balance of powers principle. In the author’s view, in the proposed Article 37f §1 (2) of the Law on Common Courts Organization a reservation should be added to explain that it is just about the exercise by the Minister’s of Justice actions “specified in the Act” that are indispensable to counter the irregularities in the administrative work of the courts, or to be applied in case of their occurrence. Moreover, he raises objections to the proposed Article 37f § 1 (3) of the above‑mentioned Act, according to which an external administrative supervision has to include “an analysis and assessment” of application of the law by the courts. That provision is in conflict with Article 8 (2) of the Act and lacks precision. According to the author, it would be advisable to supplement the proposed bill with an obligation to adjust the implementing provisions to the amended Act and to extend the period of vacatio legis.
Council and European Parliament regulations are legal acts which are directly applicable in the Polish legal order, what results in an requirement of their application by all public authorities without issuing national executive acts. Non-execution by a minister of EU acts may consist in a desistence of material and organizational activities required for their practical application. Violation of the law by the ministers results in their political responsibility. Moreover a criminal responsibility for failing to perform official duties may be imposed on former and current ministers. With regard to constitutional liability, its application may be made with a precedent judgment of the Tribunal of State. This liability may be limited by the limitation period.
The main point of the legal opinion is the question of conformity with Poland’s Constitution of the proposal for regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council [COM (2012) 369 final]. In provides an in-depth analysis of matter presented (only in general terms) in the opinion dated 27 August 2012. The author claims that Article 30(1) of the proposed regulation should be declared to be partly (i.e. in relation to the scope of regulation) inconsistent with Article 39 of the Constitution. He points out that the Constitution establishes a prohibition against medical experimentation on the human subject (and this notion includes clinical trials referred to in the proposed regulation) without his personal and prior consent. No limitation of this right is allowed, except for when it collides with other “equivalent” constitutional values, especially the right to life protection (Article 38 of the Constitution) and the right to health protection (Article 68 of the Constitution).
The aim of the article is to present a list of entities competent for provision of opinions to Deputies’ bills which specify the State’s attitude to Churches and religious organizations, regulate their legal status, as well as the relations between the Republic of Poland and churches and religious organizations. The author attempts to answer the question whether the constitutional standard resulting from Article 25 paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Constitution is met by referring a bill for consultation to appropriate churches and religious organizations. He concludes that the power to provide obligatory opinion concerning bills amending statutes relating to the State’s attitude to particular churches and religious organizations (the so-called particular statutes) is vested in ten churches and religious organizations. Moreover, the provisions of the statutes, which contain an obligation to seek a legally non-binding opinion from a competent body of a Church or religious organization (based on an appropriate particular statute), are inconsistent with Article 25 paragraph 5 of the Constitution which requires that statutes governing relations between the State and Churches and religious organizations should be preceded by agreements concluded by the Council of Ministers and their appropriate representatives.
A representative of the legislative initiative committee of citizens shall have the right to make amendments to a bill prepared and filed by this committee. This interpretation of Article 14 paragraph 2 of the Act, in conjunction with Article 36 paragraph 4 of the Standing Orders of the Sejm of the Republic of Poland, implements – to the fullest –the applicant’s right to introduce amendments to a bill under Article 119 Paragraph 2 of the Constitution. That right is, however, limited by a statutory requirement to represent the committee, and therefore amendments going beyond the scope of authorization, which may have the form of a „general power of attorney” or specific suggestions, guidelines or prohibitions, must be regarded as invalid.
Sejm committees may apply to the heads of the Internal Security Agency and Foreign Intelligence Agency (which are representatives of state institutions) with a request to provide information and explanations which concern matters falling within the scope of activity of the committee. If information requested from the above-mentioned agencies by a Sejm committee constitutes classified information within the meaning of the Act on the Protection of Classified Information, then provision thereof to the committee is allowed only after meeting stringent requirements specified in that Act and – to an extent – in the Act on Internal Security Agency and Foreign Intelligence Agency.
According to the author, in the Polish legal system there is no regulation concerning the flag protocol. Therefore, the rules of diplomatic protocol as well as heraldry and vexillology customs are applied which allow for flying, apart from the national flag, also other symbols of states or international organizations. The author claims that, due to lack of provisions governing competence to determine which authority is an appropriate body for adopting flag protocols for particular public administration buildings, this should be the power of the Marshal (Speaker) of the Sejm, who – according to the Standing Orders of the Sejm – ensures order and decorum within the precincts of the Chamber.
The article focuses on issues related to ratification of the Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence. It includes an analysis of constitutionality of the Convention itself and, then, of an international monitoring mechanism of its implementation (The Group of experts on action against violence against women and domestic violence, “GREVIO”). It also examines the possibility of ratification of the Convention without prior ratification of international law instruments referred to in its Preamble (e.g. the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse). In the author’s view, the Convention does not contain any provisions inconsistent with the Constitution. However, he claims that proper interpretation of this document requires analysis of its authentic texts in English and French. He does not find it necessary to accede to other international agreements specified in the Preamble of the Convention, since the Convention is a comprehensive and autonomous instrument whose proper application does not depend on implementation of other acts.
In Germany, the Ministry of Justice plays a central role in assessing the compatibility of draft federal laws with EU legislation. The Ministry of Internal Affairs and other ministries are also involved in this process. The Federal Minister of Justice may raise an “objection” to any bill which is inconsistent with the law (including EU law). Each new bill requires an explanatory statement which must also deal with the relationship of the bill and the EU law (with few exceptions). In fact, the responsibility for ensuring that the law adopted by the Bundestag is consistent with EU law rests primarily on the Federal Government and, within it, primarily on the legal services of the Federal Ministry of Justice.
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.
The considerations concern the issue of legality of replies of National Prosecutor to interpellations and Deputies questions on matters related to activities of the prosecution. A reply made by the National Prosecutor is possible in case when he was equipped with a special authorization of the Minister of Justice. It does satisfy the constitutional requirement for submitting these replies by members of the government. Replies provided by the National Prosecutor do not detract from the dignity of parliamentary institutions. The author shows that such replies are in full compliance with the Constitution.
The subject of the considerations is Article 110 in connection with the Article 142 paragraph 2 of the Act on Used Electrical and Eectronic Equipment, which should be regarded as a circumventing the principle of refraining from amendmening rules modifying other rules after the vacatio legis period. However the author claims that violation of basic principles of the legislative technique does not constitute a reason to omit certain rules in the consolidated text of an act, because such a text has only an editorial significance. Nevertheless an exception is a situation in which the given rule provision is recognized as legally ineffective. In case of Article 110 of the discussed Act, such situation did not occur, hence it must be held that there was no reason to omit this rule in the consolidated text of the Act
In accordance with the Electoral Code a person employed as a secretary or a treasurer of a commune (district, voivodeship) has a right to stand for election for a head of commune, a mayor and a president of the city. However, combining the function of a secretary or a treasurer with the post of the head of commune, the mayor or the president of the city in a single or in different local self-government units is inadmissible Self-local government officials employed on official posts are restricted, during a potential election campaign, by their labour duties, in particular they are not allowed to undertake activities “causing reasonable suspicion of partiality or acting in self-interest” as well as they cannot disclose information constituting a statutorily protected secret learned with in connection with the performed professional duties.
Political parties may legitimately undertake public activities (including the so-called social campaigns) aimed at encouraging citizens to provide financial support, in the form of pecuniary donations, to monetary works aimed at the implementation of a specific activity of a party within the framework of “influencing with democratic methods the state policy” and statutory goals of a given party. Such activities cannot take the form of a public collection, i.e. involve the collection of funds in cash or in kind in public places or encourage such activities. Payments to political parties made in connection with a specific purpose (e.g. preparation of a bill) are subject to the subjective and quota restrictions set out in the Act on Political Parties.
The opinion refers to the allegation that Article 25 of the act introduces different treatment of public schools run by local self-government units and public schools run by other entities. Running a public school is the most important feature in terms of entitlement to receive subsidies from the state budget and budgets of local self-government units. As to the amount of the subsidy (and the method of its calculation), the question of the legal status of the entity running a school is an important issue. Public schools run by local government units are budgetary units of the public finance sector. Budgetary units are subject to various restrictions, which do not apply to other entities. It cannot be a priori recognized that the financing schools in both cases must be based on absolutely the same – in formal terms – principles. Criterion provided by Article 25 para. 3 of the Act causes that a certain type of public post-secondary schools, in which there is no compulsory schooling or the obligation to learn, is treated like schools for adults, despite the fact that it belongs to other types of such institutions. The introduced diversity is therefore inadequate to the motive of its establishment indicated in the course of legislative works.
The author points out that the bill provides a comprehensive framework for the organization of, and proceedings before, the Constitutional Tribunal without missing any essential elements. He is in favour of the provisions aimed at eliminating loopholes and inconsistencies in the existing Constitutional Tribunal Act and the introduction of new regulations designed to prevent undue delay in proceedings before the Tribunal. However, in his view, some provisions of the bill raise doubts relating to their essence and legislative‑technique requirements and, therefore need to be rework in the course of parliamentary work on the bill. The author propose the wording of provisions complementing and clarifying the text of the bill.
The author of this opinion analyzes the possibility of recognition as Deputy’s intervention his/her application with a letter to the First President of the Supreme Court for “immediate intervention” in a particular case previously examined by the Supreme Court. In the opinion of the recipient, that document should be considered as a violation of independence of the judiciary. The author of the opinion comes to the conclusion that this letter goes beyond the regulation of the so-called Deputy’s intervention, due to the fact that judicial authorities are not those bodies to which – under this legal institution – Deputies may address their concerns. The said letter may also be viewed on the basis of the provisions of the Code of Administrative Procedure regarding the complaint. Analyzing the document in the context of the provisions of the Constitution, the author claims that the character of the letter may be the sign of actions taken to exert influence the decision-making process, which would be beyond the scope of the technical and administrative services (the so-called court administration).
A person employed as secretary of the commune (county, province), who has been granted unpaid leave in connection with the assumption of a seat in parliament, is still subject to the statutory prohibition on the creation of, and membership in, political parties. Membership in a political party of a person who is in this situation, existing at the end of unpaid leave must be considered as the basis for the refusal to allow such a person to perform the duties for the position held and for recruitment to other equivalent position. If membership in a political party would expire before returning to his/her duties in the office of the commune, it could be by the employer as a basis for changing conditions employment (change in position), but there is no such necessity.
Zgodnie z artykułem 63 Konstytucji Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej oraz Ustawą o Petycjach jednostki samorządu terytorialnego i ich władze nie są upoważnione do składania petycji do Sejmu. Przepisy te nie wykluczają jednak sytuacji, w której osoby pełniące funkcję publiczną we władzach jednostek samorządu terytorialnego składają indywidualne lub zbiorowe petycje.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.