Search results

1

Specjalne użycie broni. Wybrane aspekty prawne

100%

Kosmaty P.

Studia Prawnicze KUL

|

2021

|

issue 1

143-164

EN

The increasing number of terrorist acts has necessitated the introduction of novel legal solutions allowing for the efficient protection of the state. The following paper focuses on the legal premises of the application of firearms by the police and other services, with particular attention to the so-called precision shot: an instrument introduced by the counter-terrorist measures act of 2 July 2016. Keeping in mind that the aforementioned solution inevitably collides with a whole range of personal rights and freedom, the author conducts an analysis of the legal mechanisms underlying the depenalisation of such measures, with particular attention paid to the countertype of a prohibited action within the legal bounds of service rights and duties, as well as forced defence. The article also refers to the standard of protection of human rights with the forced use of firearms viewed from the perspective of article 2 of the European Code of Human Rights defining the right to live, as clarified by the Strasburg jury. Finally, the paper discusses a range of practical situations where the special application of firearms may be necessary.

PL

Wzrastająca liczba ataków terrorystycznych powoduje, iż niezbędne staje się wprowadzanie nowych instytucji prawnych, które pozwolą na skuteczną ochronę bezpieczeństwa państwa. Celem artykułu jest przybliżenie przesłanek legalności użycia broni palnej przez funkcjonariuszy policji i innych służb, ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem tzw. strzału snajperskiego – instrumentu wprowadzonego na mocy ustawy z dnia 2 lipca 2016 r. o działaniach antyterrorystycznych. Mając z kolei na względzie, iż nieunikniona pozostaje kolizja wskazanych uprawnień z szeregiem praw i wolności jednostki, autor dokonuje analizy mechanizmów prawnych prowadzących do depenalizacji takich zachowań – kontratypu działania w ramach uprawnień i obowiązków oraz obrony koniecznej. Przywołany zostaje także wypracowany w orzecznictwie strasburskim standard ochrony praw człowieka w zakresie użycia broni palnej z perspektywy art. 2 EKPC chroniącego prawo do życia. Końcowo, autor wskazuje na sytuacje, w jakich w praktyce może mieć miejsce specjalne użycie broni palnej.

2

Strzał ratunkowy jako okoliczność wyłączająca bezprawność czynu

100%

Kosmaty P.

Przegląd Bezpieczeństwa Wewnętrznego

|

2020

|

vol. 12

|

issue 23

254-270

PL

Wzrastająca liczba ataków terrorystycznych powoduje, że niezbędnie należy wprowadzić nowe instytucje prawne, które pozwolą na skuteczne zapewnienie bezpieczeństwa państwa. Celem artykułu jest przybliżenie przesłanek legalności użycia broni palnej przez funkcjonariuszy policji i innych służb, ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem tzw. strzału snajperskiego – instrumentu wprowadzonego na mocy Ustawy z dnia 10 czerwca 2016 r. o działaniach antyterrorystycznych. Ponieważ kolizja wskazanych uprawnień z wieloma przepisami dotyczącymi praw i wolności jednostki jest nieunikniona, autor dokonał analizy mechanizmów prawnych prowadzących do depenalizacji takich zachowań – kontratypu działania w ramach uprawnień i obowiązków oraz obrony koniecznej. W artykule został przywołany także standard ochrony praw człowieka w zakresie użycia broni palnej z perspektywy art. 2 EKPC, który został wypracowany w orzecznictwie strasburskim chroniącym prawo do życia. Autor wskazał również na sytuacje, w jakich w praktyce może dojść do specjalnego użycia broni palnej.

EN

The increasing number of terrorist acts has necessitated the introduction of novel legal solutions allowing for efficient protection of the state. The following article focuses on the legality of the use of firearms by the police and other services, with particular reference to the so-called precision shot: a tool introduced under the Act of 10 June 2016 on anti-terrorist activities. Due to the inevitable interference of the indicated rights with numerous regulations concerning personal rights and freedom, the author conducted an analysis of the legal mechanisms leading to the depenalization of such measures – justification of acts within the framework of rights, duties and necessary self-defense. The article also refers to protection of human rights in terms of firearms use with regard to Article 2 of the European Convention of Human Rights. It is defined by the Strasbourg court and it protects the right to live. The author also points out to the situations where the special use of a weapon can be necessary.

3

Koncepcja kryminalizacji migracji a przepisy ustawy o działaniach antyterrorystycznych

85%

Buczkowski K.

Archiwum Kryminologii

|

2016

|

issue XXXVIII

15-27

EN

The paper addresses the issues related to the concepts of criminalizing migration as encountered in the literature, and their practical application in constructing the legislation on foreign nationals, including Polish nationals, in particular consideration of the provisions of the Anti-Terrorist Operations Act of June 10, 2016. Migration processes are inherently related to the functioning of societies. It is estimated that currently as a result of migration, ca. 120 million people live in countries other than those in which they were born. The past century was marked by a series of events that caused large waves of migration, i.e. the two world wars, but also the geopolitical changes taking place across the world after 1945, e.g. end of the colonial period, the Cold War, and the collapse of the communist system in Central and Eastern European countries. The 21st century is not free from large scale migrations. They are, inter alia, the result of the strategy of combating terrorism, especially of Islamic provenance, pursued by the United States, following the attacks of September 11, 2001. In due course, this policy spawned the processes of destruction of political systems in northern African countries and on the Arabian Peninsula, and consequently the endeavours of the citizens of those countries to make their way to the rich European countries. As frequently referenced throughout the literature on the subject, this background of large scale migration gave rise to a conflict between the Global North, i.e. a number of highly developed and industrialised countries, with the Global South, a concept which covers a group of developing countries formerly called Third World countries. The Global North is perceived as the final destination for the residents of the Global South, who are also being portrayed as a potential threat (including that of terrorism), which should effectively be warded off. Nowadays, migration has acquired a new image, having evolved from a much desirable process into something perceived by the liberal world as synonymous with potential threat. Migrants, not only those from the Islamic countries, are portrayed as a threat, whereas regarding them as a necessary component for the development of capitalism, popular until very recently, seems to be clearly off the agenda now, if not altogether abandoned. Such new trends in the perception of migrants are becoming even more prevalent due to the acts of terror for religious reasons committed in the countries of the Global North of which the migrants are then accused of, often unjustly so. Consequently, politically motivated concepts of combating terrorism come into being, which firmly assign both the cause and effect of such attacks to ‘alien nationals.’ This leads to a policy in which some groups of people shall enjoy the benefits of ‘full social inclusion,’ having become privileged with regard to the law in place, whereas others stand to suffer exclusion, separation, with their rights curtailed or restricted. In line with the ‘membership theory’ proposed by Juliet Stumpf, the positive rights arise from the social contract concluded between the government and the citizens. Those who are not part of the social contract, additionally being subjected to further actions taken by the government, are unable to claim any rights or positive rights equivalent to those enjoyed by the privileged ‘members.’ Therefore, the differences arise between the rights of citizens and the rights of non-citizens, the latter being much worse off in terms of their legal status than the former. Then the phenomenon of criminalization of legal provisions governing migration comes into being, defined by Stumpf as crimmigration, i.e. bringing together inherently different regulatory frameworks: criminal law (laid down for those who infringe the rules in force in a particular society, but at the same time functioning within that very same society), and the migration law (pertaining to non-citizens, or non-members of a particular community, whose only ‘fault’ consists in the fact that they just happen to have found themselves on the territory of a foreign state). A good example of such trends in Polish law may be the provisions of the Anti- -Terrorist Operations Act of June 10, 2016, and the amendments introduced into other laws in result of its adoption, including those pertaining directly to foreign nationals, as well as the regulations pertaining to the scope of statutory activities assigned to the state uniformed services. Generally speaking, this legislation differentiates between the legal status of the persons who are Polish nationals (enjoying the benefit of full legal protection), and the persons not vested with such a status, which may cause an infringement to the principle of freedom and equality before the law that stems directly from the provisions of Article 31 and Article 32 of the Polish Constitution, in conjunction with Article 37, Section 1, granting all persons under the authority of the Republic of Poland, inclusive of foreign nationals, the benefit of rights and freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution, and by other pertinent provisions of international law, as ratified by Poland. The right of every state to ensure the security of its citizens, also against the threats of a terrorist nature, may not be put into question. In the modern world, in which a series of conflicts that have been dormant for the last decade have just got rekindled, or brand-new ones started as a result of specific actions carried out by various countries, deploying adequate measures designed to counter terrorism effectively is absolutely essential. It should be borne in mind, though, that in the legal systems functioning in democratic countries, as much as the rights of the aggrieved parties (i.e. victims of a crime) are being upheld and protected, so are the rights of the perpetrators of such criminal acts. It should not be any different with regard to the perpetrators of terrorist acts, regardless of whether they just happen to be the citizens of the country in which they carried out a particular act of terror. A number of procedural constraints could be introduced with respect to such persons, or specifically structured modes of legal proceedings, but those should always be fully compliant with the minimum standards of human rights, as commonly recognized by the international community.

Refine search results

1 Archiwum Kryminologii

1 Przegląd Bezpieczeństwa Wewnętrznego

1 Studia Prawnicze KUL

1 2021

1 2020

1 2016

2 Kosmaty P.

1 Buczkowski K.

Specjalne użycie broni. Wybrane aspekty prawne

Strzał ratunkowy jako okoliczność wyłączająca bezprawność czynu

Koncepcja kryminalizacji migracji a przepisy ustawy o działaniach antyterrorystycznych