Search results

1

Wydalenie ipso facto z instytutu zakonnego

100%

Stokłosa M.

Sympozjum

|

2013

|

issue 2(25)

123-138

EN

The dismissal of a member ipso facto from the Religious Institute which quite often is referred to in the Canon Law literature (a iure) is automatic and without the intervention of any ecclesial or religious authority. It concerns perpetually or temporarily professed religious. It is effective the moment a religious commits one of two serious offences against Church Law as enumerated in Canon Law 694 §1. A member is to be considered automatically dismissed if he/she: has notoriously defected from the Catholic faith o has contracted marriage or attempted it, even only civilly. The religious is no longer a member of the Institute through the fact of the offence stated in this Canon. However, the major superior with his council, after collecting the evidence about offences done by religious is obliged to issue without delay a declaration of the fact so that the dismissal is juridically established. According to canon 694, §2, “in these cases, after the proof has been collected, the major superior with the council is to issue without any delay, a declaration of fact so that the dismissal is established juridically.” This act is a formal declaration which confirms the fact of the offence committed by religious and at the same time is a legal confirmation of his dismissal at the moment the offence was committed, and before the declaration of the major superior and his council was made.

2

Zobowiązanie cudzoziemca do powrotu – nowa jakość w polskim prawie o cudzoziemcach? Refleksje o wdrożeniu dyrektywy powrotowej

51%

Narożniak A.

Studia Prawa Publicznego

|

2014

|

issue 2(6)

155-187

EN

The subject of this article is the obligation to return as a new instrument in the Polish law on foreigners. This obligation to return has been in force since 1 May 2014 and replaces the previously functioning expulsion and the obligation to leave the territory of the Republic of Poland. New legal solutions result from the transposition of so called “Return Directive”, agreed in 2008 and the entry into force of the Foreigners Act of 12 December 2013. The question is whether these solutions constitute an absolute novelty or whether they are a stage in the evolution of the Polish law on foreigners. Is it merely a correction of the former standards or a totally new quality? The answer to these questions is crucial, as the regulations concerning the status of illegally staying foreigners are a measure show whether the balance between the protection of human rights and the protection of public interest in its numerous aspects is achieved. Seeking for the answer, the author firstly presents the provisions of the Return Directive and subsequently introduces the institution of the obligation to return against the background of the legal regulation of expulsion and obligation to leave the territory of the Republic of Poland. The analysis addresses types of administrative decisions in these matters, their premises, contents, legal consequences and execution as well as a tolerated stay permit and a permission to stay for humanitarian reasons. Competent authorities and different forms of aid and assistance offered to foreigners are also discussed. The deliberations end with a few reflections. In the conclusion it is stated that the obligation to return is not, as such, revolutionary in the Polish law on foreigners. However, many of the new solutions constitute important developments, generally in favour of the above mentioned balance between the protection of human rights and public interest. Despite this principally positive evaluation, it is noteworthy that some of them may pose a certain risk.

PL

Artykuł poświęcony jest nowej w polskim porządku prawnym instytucji zobowiązania cudzoziemca do powrotu, która z dniem 1 maja 2014 r. zastępuje funkcjonujące wcześniej równolegle instytucje: wydalenia i zobowiązania cudzoziemca do opuszczenia terytorium Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej. Nowe rozwiązania są w znacznej mierze skutkiem wdrożenia tzw. dyrektywy powrotowej przyjętej w 2008 r. i wejścia w życie Ustawy o cudzoziemcach z dnia 12 grudnia 2013 r. Autorka zadaje pytanie, czy rozwiązania te mają charakter całkowicie nowatorski, czy też stanowią wyraz ewolucji polskiego prawa o cudzoziemcach. Czy mamy do czynienia jedynie z korektą dotychczasowych standardów czy z ich zupełnie nową jakością? Odpowiedź na te pytania jest istotna, gdyż sposób traktowania cudzoziemca przebywającego na terytorium państwa niezgodnie z prawem jest wyznacznikiem stopnia równowagi pomiędzy wymogami poszanowania praw człowieka a ochroną interesu publicznego w różnych jego aspektach. Poszukując odpowiedzi na postawione pytania, autorka prezentuje postanowienia dyrektywy powrotowej, a następnie przedstawia instytucję zobowiązania cudzoziemca do powrotu na tle wydalenia i zobowiązania cudzoziemca do opuszczenia terytorium Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej. Analiza dotyczy rodzajów decyzji, przesłanek ich wydania, treści, skutków prawnych, wykonania, udzielenia zgody na pobyt tolerowany i zgody na pobyt ze względów humanitarnych, właściwości organów oraz form pomocy dla cudzoziemca. Rozważania zamyka garść refleksji. Konkluzje obejmują stwierdzenie, że instytucja zobowiązania cudzoziemca do powrotu jako taka nie ma charakteru rewolucyjnego w polskim prawie o cudzoziemcach. Znaczna część rozwiązań wprowadza jednak istotne zmiany, zasadniczo sprzyjające wspomnianej równowadze między poszanowaniem praw człowieka a interesem publicznym. Pomimo tej ogólnie pozytywnej oceny niektóre z nich zdają się nieść za sobą również pewne ryzyko w tym zakresie.

3

Gwarancje proceduralne na wypadek wydalenia cudzoziemca w systemie Europejskiej konwencji praw człowieka

51%

Mizerski R.

Studia Prawa Publicznego

|

2016

|

issue 3 (15)

61-97

EN

The author discusses the legal basis, the cope of application, the content and the concurrence of procedural guarantees in the event of an expulsion of an alien under the European Convention. These guarantees stem from Article 1 of Protocol No. 7, Article 4 of Protocol No. 4, Articles 13 and 34 of the Convention as well as from the concepts of positive obligations and tests of legality and necessity, developed in the case law of the Strasbourg Court. Guarantees under Article 1 of Protocol No. 7 and Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 are the only ones that are applicable regardless of whether an expulsion results in the violation of an alien’s rights or the limitation of the freedoms arising from the Convention. Moreover, they do not apply to extradition proceedings, whereas the other guarantees do. However, in the context of the guarantees resulting from Article 13 of the Convention and the concepts of positive obligations as well as the tests of legality and necessity, a common standard of procedural requirements in an event of an expulsion of an alien seems to have emerged. It includes the alien’s right to information on the speciﬁ c reasons for expulsion; available remedies and a possibility of obtaining legal assistance; the right to submit arguments against expulsion; the right to be represented; the right to have the case reviewed; the right to an independent and impartial authority competent to decide in the case. In the event where an expulsion puts an alien in danger of irreversible damage to his/her rights, the person concerned should have, in addition, access to a remedy with automatic suspensive eff ect. This standard is also quite common to guarantees stemming from Articles 1 of Protocol No. 7 and Article 4 of Protocol No. 4. However, since “competent authority” under Article 1 of Protocol No. 7 need not be the authority with whom the ﬁ nal decision on expulsion rests and because it is possible to expel an alien before the exercise of his/her rights under this Article, the author is of the opinion that the latter should apply only to expulsions that do not threaten conventional rights.

4

Transpozycja zasady non-refoulement do polskiego systemu ochrony uchodźców

41%

Grześkowiak M.

Studia Iuridica

|

2018

|

vol. 76

199-217

PL

The paper aims at examining the influence of international legislations on the scope and content of the non-refoulement principle as articulated in the Polish law. Its shape on the Polish national ground is in fact a sum of influences stemming from external law systems. The article is based on the determination of three major sources of the refugee law that shape the content of the principle: public international law, European Union law and Polish national law. The Author first scrutinises the scope and content of the principle as laid down in crucial legislations belonging to these three sources which later enables their comparison and examination of the impact they make on one another in terms of conceptualisation of the principle of non-refoulement. The EU law reflects and specifies mechanisms established in the public international law which are further specified on a national ground. The final product is a national structure of the principle which is far more specific than the one known from the 1951 Refugee Convention that first stipulated it. The Author concludes with pointing at flaws and inaccuracies in a national articulation of the principle.

5

Pushback Policies and Practices toward Migrants and Protection of Human Rights (The Council of Europe’s Approach)

41%

Spryszak K.

Przegląd Prawa Konstytucyjnego

|

2019

|

issue 5 (51)

285-298

EN

To control and manage migration flows, the Council of Europe member states concentrate much of their efforts on guarding frontiers. In this context, refusals of entry and expulsions without any individual assessment of protection needs have become a documented phenomenon at European borders, as well as on the territories of member states further inland. As these practices are widespread, and in some countries systematic, those “pushbacks” can be considered as a part of national policies rather than incidental actions. The highest risk attached to pushbacks is the risk of refoulement, meaning that a person is sent back to a place where she might face persecution in the sense of the 1951 United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. The author analyzes PACE Resolution 2299 (2019) Pushback policies and practice in the Council of Europe member States and recommendation 2161 (2019) on this subject offered by this international organization. The author suggests that even if this document belongs to the so-called “soft law”, it has an important political meaning and PACE’s recommendations may positively affect the CoE’s member states policy toward the pushbacks.

PL

W zakresie kontroli i zarządzania falami migracyjnymi Rada Europy koncentruje swe wysiłki na punktach granicznych. W tym kontekście uważa, że odmowa wjazdu i wydalenie osób bez jakiejkolwiek indywidualnej analizy staje się istotnym problemem na granicach Europy, a także na terytoriach państw członkowskich. Ponieważ te praktyki są powszechne, a w niektórych państwach systematyczne, te „wypchnięcia” muszą być traktowane jako część polityki krajowej, a nie jako incydentalne działania. Największe ryzyko wiąże się z możliwością wydalenia człowieka do państwa, gdzie grozi mu prześladowanie w rozumieniu konwencji Narodów Zjednoczonych dotyczącej statusu uchodźców. Autor poddał analizie uchwałę ZPRE 2299(2019) Polityka i praktyka odepchnięcia w państwach członkowskich Rady Europy oraz zalecenie 2169(2019) na ten temat zaoferowane przez tę organizację międzynarodową. Autor sugeruje, że choć dokument ten ma jedynie charakter tzw. „miękkiego prawa”, to jednak zalecenie ZPRE ma istotne polityczne znaczenie i może pozytywnie oddziaływać na politykę państw członkowskich RE w tej kwestii.

Refine search results

2 Studia Prawa Publicznego

1 Przegląd Prawa Konstytucyjnego

1 Studia Iuridica

1 Sympozjum

3 2019

1 2014

1 2013

1 Grześkowiak M.

1 Mizerski R.

1 Narożniak A.

1 Spryszak K.

1 Stokłosa M.

Wydalenie ipso facto z instytutu zakonnego

Zobowiązanie cudzoziemca do powrotu – nowa jakość w polskim prawie o cudzoziemcach? Refleksje o wdrożeniu dyrektywy powrotowej

Gwarancje proceduralne na wypadek wydalenia cudzoziemca w systemie Europejskiej konwencji praw człowieka

Transpozycja zasady non-refoulement do polskiego systemu ochrony uchodźców

Pushback Policies and Practices toward Migrants and Protection of Human Rights (The Council of Europe’s Approach)