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:  PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE
help Sort By:

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

THE STATUS OF THE MARSHAL OF THE SEJM IN THE SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT AND THE RIGHTS OF THE PARLIAMENTARY OPPOSITION (Stanowisko ustrojowe marszalka Sejmu a prawa opozycji parlamentarnej)

100%
Pastuszko G.
Przegląd Sejmowy
|
2009
|
issue 2(91)
9-30
EN
The article deals with mutual relations between the Marshal (Speaker) of the Sejm and parliamentary opposition. It strives to depict the president of the Chamber as an authority responsible for initiating contacts between the political groups competing in Parliament. The research assumptions made by the author allow us to approach the powers of the Marshal from the perspective of the division of parliament into two legal and political structures, i.e. the opposition and the government supporting parties. The legal solutions concerning the status of the Marshal of the Sejm are determined by the fact that the office of the Marshal is, in each case, held by a person representing the camp of the ruling parties. The politicisation of the function of Marshal results in the possibility of discrimination of the opposition in the Sejm.. This fact inspires us to think about the problem of political neutrality o the president of the Chamber, since the specific nature of that office is reflected in the need to reconcile interests of different political groups functioning in parliament. The Marshal is responsible for organising the work of the Sejm. Therefore, he is required to make numerous decisions that cause risk of being biased in favour or against a particular option. The existence of many initiatives launched by individual groups depends on his will. Therefore, the concern of neutrality within the scope of powers exercised by him is widely held. It is justified. The more so that the existing legal provisions do not include the clause of political neutrality. In this context, the Marshal should justly balance the influence exerted by all political formations. The fact that the Marshal is, in fact, the nominee of the ruling majority is determined by the procedure for his appointment. Under the existing rules of procedure, the Chamber elects the Marshal by an absolute majority of votes. The requirement of arithmetical majority gives a privileged position to the ruling camp, leaving the opposition little chance to force through its candidate. For the opposition, the possibility of dismissal of the Marshal of the Chamber is of great significance. This issue - due to the lack of clear regulations under the former legal order - has caused doubts for many years. However, these dilemmas have had only doctrinal nature, since the Sejm actually recognised and established its powers in this area. An unambiguous normative rule, expressly providing for dismissal of the office of president of the Chamber was adopted only in an amendment to the rules of procedure of the Sejm in January 2009. These new solutions permits dismissal of the Marshal, among other things, for political reasons. On the other hand, however, they impose other substantial restrictions of formal nature (the procedure based on the constructive vote of no confidence, which requires those applying for dismissal of the president of the chamber to nominate his successor) that may cause difficulties to the opposition. .
2
Content available remote

ON THE NEED FOR REFORM OF BICAMERALISM OF POLISH PARLIAMENT (W sprawie potrzeby reformy dwuizbowosci polskiego parlamentu)

100%
Dobrowolski M.
Przegląd Sejmowy
|
2009
|
issue 2(91)
31-53
EN
Modern bicameralism has existed in Poland for twenty years now. Its basic structure was formed in 1989-1992, with further slight modifications (often necessitated by reforms in extra-parliamentary areas of the system of government). To sum up, the evolution of the position of the Senate tends, ultimately, to diminishing its role in the system of government (stages thereof are determined, inter alia, by the way in which the Round-Table Agreements were translated into the solutions adopted in the April 1989 Amendment, by the occurrence and consequences of the legislative stalemate, by the change in the edition of the provisions specifying the moment of transferring an adopted bill to the President of the Republic for signature, and by the judicial practice of the Constitutional Tribunal in relation to the meaning of the term 'amendment by the Senate'. The continuance of such direction of the evolution would reduce the role of the Senate to that of a middle-quality legislative bureau, and which - in turn - will raise the question of its further existence. Therefore, we should initiate a discussion on its general reform. At the beginning of the discussion, it is worth mentioning that parliamentary procedures must lead to effective decision-making in which the matter could be talked over. Then, both the Chambers are involved in an intra-parliamentary 'discussion' on the political choice of the best solutions. It seems that the reason for the establishment of the Senate is the application by that Chamber of a different perspective of view in consideration of particular matter. This requires the necessity of a political diversity of membership of the Chambers and modification of mutual relations between them. This approach would lead to the elimination of the provision 'Sejm shall adopt statutes' and making the term of office of the Senate independent of the term of office of the Sejm, as well as modification of the principles concerning the setting up of the composition of the second Chamber. The latter proposal might by achieved by the introduction of a 6-year tern of the Senate with one-third of its membership exchanged every two years or by the election of senators by electoral colleges composed of councillors from the local governments of all levels and presidents of the towns, mayors and heads of communes. To support the 'professional factor', the composition of the Senate should be supplemented by persons who had held the highest state offices in the past. The discussion on these proposals, as it seems, would result in developing an optimal shape of Polish bicameralism.
3
Content available remote

NEW ASPECTS OF THE STATUS OF A COMMITTEE OF POLISH SEJM (Nowe aspekty statusu komisji Sejmu RP)

100%
Pajdala H.
Przegląd Sejmowy
|
2009
|
issue 2(91)
91-102
EN
The article deals with new elements determining the status of Sejm committees, existing in its structure and functioning between the promulgation of the consolidated texts of the rules of procedure of the Sejm in 20002 and 2009. It presents procedural changes relating to institutional and organizational contexts of the functioning of Sejm committees, including - in particular - systemic arrangement and evaluation of their nature and trends of their development. The author accentuates not only the current legal position typical of particular stages of institutional transformations, but also takes into account suggestions made in this respect by law sciences. The two recent amendments of the rules of procedure of the Sejm are of particularly great importance, as they include the recommended introduction of the provisions aimed at arrangement and adjustment. Procedural amendments of 2003-2008, affecting the Sejm committees, may be described in two ways: as a structural separation of new bodies and attributing them with new scopes of responsibility and as the changes concerning adjustment of procedural provisions to existing statutes imposing particular task on the Sejm and its organs.
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.