Domniemanie przyjęcia poprawki senackiej jako konstytucyjny standard procesu legislacyjnego

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 75-92
Author(s):  
Olga Kazalska
Keyword(s):  
Essential Elements ◽  
Absolute Majority ◽  
Constitutional Tribunal ◽  
Legislative Procedure ◽  
The Republic

On 5 August 2015, at the plenary sitting of the Sejm, was submitted the motion to adopt the Senate’s amendments. Despite obtaining an absolute majority of votes, the Marshal of the Sejm declared their rejection by the Sejm. Doubts regarding the compliance with all the requirements of the legislative procedure prompted the President of the Republic of Poland to bring the case to the Constitutional Tribunal for consideration. It was necessary to determine whether the presumption of adoption of the Senate amendment, adopted in the Constitution of 1997, is a regulation on the essential elements of the legislative procedure, violation of which determines unconstitutionality of the legislative act.

scholarly journals Skutki prawne naruszenia terminów w postępowaniu legislacyjnym

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 249
Author(s):  
Robert Orłowski
Keyword(s):  
Time Limit ◽  
Independent Basis ◽  
Time Limits ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Rules Of Procedure ◽  
Constitutional Tribunal ◽  
Specific Activities ◽  
Legislative Procedure ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic

<p>The aim of the article is to present the issues related to the time limits set for individual organs of public authority (the Sejm, the Senate, the President of the Republic of Poland) for the performance of specific activities within the legislative procedure. These time limits should be calculated according to conventional rules, that is, from the beginning of the day following the day on which the act on which the legal provisions are binding begins. However, the action will also be effective if it is performed on the same day on which the said event occurred. Violation of the time limit in legislative proceedings is of fundamental importance for the act, as a normative act, within the scope of its validity. As part of the review of the constitutionality of the law, the Constitutional Tribunal also examines the correctness of the proceedings in which the law was adopted. According to the latest jurisprudence of the Constitutional Tribunal, violation of the minimum time limits required for the performance of individual activities, which have only been specified in the Rules of Procedure of the Sejm, may constitute an independent basis for declaring the entire act unconstitutional. This view differs significantly from the existing, well-established approach to this subject. The effects of violating the time limits of the legislative procedure can also be considered at the level of the rights (competences) of individual authorities within a specific proceeding. The signing of the act by the President after the expiry of the constitutional time limit should be deemed legally effective. The admissibility of issuing by the Constitutional Tribunal of scope judgements should be considered in cases of violation of the rules of correct legislation, leading to the omission or reduction of <em>vacatio legis</em>.</p>

Konstytucyjne zasady postępowania karnego na tle orzecznictwa Polskiego Trybunału Konstytucyjnego

2017 ◽  
pp. 67-86
Author(s):  
Arkadiusz Krajewski
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Social Factor ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
Constitutional Tribunal ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Humanitarian Principle ◽  
The Right ◽  
Social Importance

The Constitutional Tribunal is defined as the Polish constitutional court and at the same time the judicial authority. It was created at the turn of 1982. Not long after that it began its jurisprudence; more precisely it was in 1986. Describing its basic tasks, it is pointed out that judicial review of so-called constitutional law deserves a closer look. This is particularly true about controlling the compliance of lower legal norms with higher legal norms. Here attention is drawn towards the connection of the Constitution with some international agreements, ie. the court of law. The purpose of the paper below was to analyze the constitutional principles of criminal proceedings in the context of the case law of the Polish Constitutional Court. At the beginning the concept, the division and the role of the constitutional rules of criminal procedure were presented. In this section, it was emphasized that all the rules of the criminal process are considered superior norms of a very significant social importance. Then the principle of objectivity, which is reflected in the Constitution of the Republic, was described. A following aspect was the discussion of the principle of the presumption of innocence and the principle of in dubio pro reo. It has been emphasized that the essence of the principle is that the person who was brought before the court is treated as innocent until a lawful judgment is pronounced against the defendant. The author also pointed out the principle of the right to defense. According to this rule, the defendant has the right to defend themselves in the process and to use the help of a defender. Another described principle is so-called rule of publicity. It concerns the fact that information about criminal proceedings should be accessible to the public. Then it was pointed to the principle of the right to the trial and the independence of the judiciary. The first one is reflected in national law and acts of international rank. The second shows that the independence of the judiciary is determined by the proper exercise of the profession of judge and becomes a guarantee of freedom and civil rights. The humanitarian principle and the principle of participation of the social factor in the penal process are shown in the final section. At the end of the paper a summary and conclusions were presented.

State of emergency in Poland: constitutional regulation and “hybrid” nature during the COVID-19 pandemic

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 41-67
Author(s):  
Valentina Chekharina
Keyword(s):  
The State ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
State Of Emergency ◽  
Hybrid State ◽  
Political Interests ◽  
The World ◽  
Constitutional Tribunal ◽  
Law And Justice ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Emergency Measures

The COVID-19 pandemic became widespread across the world throughout 2020 and 2021 in an emergency that gravely impacted the health and lives of people around the world. States have taken exceptional measures to combat the pandemic, including controversial decisions to introduce emergency regimes, which have been questioned in regards to their compliance with constitutional regulations. The fight against the COVID-19 pandemic requires special measures, however they must remain within the constitutional framework. Consequently, the pandemic and its effect upon the legality of regimes in a state of emergency has captured the attention of legal scholars. The aim of this study is to analyse the constitutional regulation of the state of emergency in the Republic of Poland which was introduced in the country during the COVID-19 pandemic. In Poland, an emergency regime was introduced following an order by the Minister of Health. However the state of emergency (here, natural disaster) as stated by the Constitution was not introduced, although, according to analysts, some state bodies and officials had confirmed that all the necessary conditions for this were met. On 2 March 2020, the so-called Special Law on Coronavirus was adopted, followed by other regulations to fight the pandemic. These analysts stated that the measures introduced by the new acts corresponded to a legal regime containing the constitutional characteristics of a state of emergency, but lacked the appropriate constitutional procedure for their introduction. Presidential elections were held at this time, however legally they cannot be held during a state of emergency, as it indicates the presence of political interests in the choice of the regime. The unconstitutional procedure of the introduction of emergency measures alongside their characteristics of the state of emergency make it possible to consider the epidemic regime introduced in Poland a “hybrid” state of emergency, which is not detailed by the Constitution or legislation. On this basis, the study concludes that reasons behind the unconstitutional response to the COVID-19 pandemic in Poland can be found in both the Constitution, and in the manifestations of the crisis of the constitutional and legal system, which began with the reform of Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal by the ruling Law and Justice party in 2015.

Glosa do Wyroku Trybunału Konstytucyjnego z dnia 14 grudnia 2017 r., sygn. akt K 17/14

2021 ◽  
Vol 1(162) ◽  
pp. 179-191
Author(s):  
Justyna Karaźniewicz
Keyword(s):  
Narrow Scope ◽  
Constitutional Tribunal ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right ◽  
Laws And Regulations

In the commented judgment, the Constitutional Tribunal stated that the provisions of laws and regulations providing for the right of officers of many services to search a person or carry out a personal inspection are inconsistent with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. The inappropriate division of regulations between laws and sub-statutory acts, violating the constitutional requirement of specifying the principles and procedure of limiting the rights and freedoms of the individual at the level of a law, was rightly questioned. The Tribunal also referred to the obligation to ensure effective mechanisms of protection of individuals against unjustified interference with their rights through the introduction of effective measures of appeal against undertaken actions. Due to the narrow scope of the Ombudsman’s request initiating proceedings before the Tribunal, the consideration was limited only to certain aspects of searches and personal inspection. However, valuable, albeit fragmentary, references to the essence of these activities and their normative shape, desirable from the constitutional perspective, can be found in the judgement.

Legal conflict between the EU and the republic of Poland regarding polish judicial reform

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Yakovyuk ◽  
Suzanna Asiryan ◽  
Anastasiya Lazurenko
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Judicial Reform ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Constitutional Tribunal ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Eu

Problem setting. On October 7, 2021, the Constitutional Tribunal of the Republic of Poland ruled in favor of Polish law over European Union law, which in the long run may violate the principles according to which the Union operates and the rights enjoyed by citizens of the state. Such a precedent can further serve as a basis for identical decisions of the bodies of constitutional jurisdiction of those states that have problems in fulfilling their obligations in the European community. Analysis of recent researches and publications. The problems of the functioning of the bodies of the European Union, the implementation of their decisions and the general status in EU law are widely studied in national science. In particular, many scholars have studied the legal nature of the EU, including: TM Anakina, VI Muravyov, NM Ushakov, A. Ya. Kapustina, NA Korolyova, Yu. Yumashev, BN Topornin, OYa Tragniuk, SS Seliverstov, IV Yakovyuk and others. Target of research is to establish the foundations of EU law in the functioning of Union bodies, especially the Court, as well as to determine the hierarchy of national law and EU law. Article’s main body. Over the years, the Court has, within its jurisdiction, issued a large number of judgments which have become the source of the Union’s Constituent Treaties and of EU law in general. Over the last two decades, the powers of the Court of Justice have changed significantly. In particular, this is due to the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty, which amended the EU’s founding treaties on the powers of the Court, then the reform of the European Court took place in 2015-2016, which concerned a change in the organizational structure of the Court. Despite the generally well-established case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the unification of the observance by the Member States of the basic principles of the European Union, the Constitutional Tribunal of the Republic of Poland adopted a decision on 7 October. Conclusions and prospects for the development. Following the decision of the Constitutional Court, the Polish authorities found themselves in a situation that significantly complicated its internal and external situation. The way out of which requires answers to fundamental questions about the legal nature of the EU. Undoubtedly, this is an issue not only between Poland and the EU, but also between other member states.

Glosa do Wyroku Trybunału Konstytucyjnego z dnia 16 maja 2018 r., sygn. akt SK 18/17

2021 ◽  
Vol 4(165) ◽  
pp. 147-158
Author(s):  
Agnieszka Kawałko
Keyword(s):  
Family Relationship ◽  
Time Limit ◽  
Biological Origin ◽  
The Right To Know ◽  
Civil Status ◽  
Constitutional Tribunal ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Moment ◽  
The Right ◽  
Age Of Majority

The commented ruling of the Constitutional Tribunal concerns the constitutionality of the provision of Article 70(1) of the Family and Guardianship Code, which provided that the time limit for a child to bring an action to deny the paternity of his or her mother’s husband is three years and runs from the moment the child reaches the age of majority, regardless of the child’s know-ledge of his or her biological origin, i.e. regardless of whether the child within that time limit acquired knowledge that he or she did not come from his or her mother’s husband and whether the child could decide to bring an action. The expiry of the three-year period resulted in the expiry of the child’s right to claim the denial of paternity of the mother’s husband and, consequently, precluded the possibility of a positive determination of the paternity of a man other than the mother’s husband. The Constitutional Tribunal found this provision to be inconsistent with Article 30 in conjunction with Article 47 in conjunction with Article 31(3) of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. The author agrees with the position expressed by the Constitutional Tribunal in the judgment in question, which in this case provides a basis for consideration of the relationship between the right to know one’s biological origin and the value of stabilising the civil status of a child and persons remaining in an established family relationship with him or her.

Public debt limit of the EU Member States and its impact on polish legal system – considerations in the context of public finance stability

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 239-255
Author(s):  
Wojciech Bożek
Keyword(s):  
Public Debt ◽  
Comparative Method ◽  
Reference Value ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Fiscal Rules ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Constitutional Tribunal ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Eu

The author’s goal is to determine the consequences of implementing treaty solutions concerning public debt to the Polish Constitution and to define the differences between the methodology of counting public debt in the European Community and Polish legal order. The raised issues concern important problems from the substantive and practical point of view, therefore the study’s content is important for science and practice. The research methodology was based on the analysis of the EU and Poland’s normative solutions, opinions expressed in the international and national literature on the subject, and the case law of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal. The paper applies mostly the dogmatic-analytic and legal-comparative method with reference to available statistical data on Poland’s public debt. The study allowed the author to gain an understanding of the significance of fiscal rules implemented at the EU level to ensure stability. Article 216(5) of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland indicates that the treaty solutions regarding the reference value (public debt-to-GDP ratio) were reenacted. However, until this day, the EU and Poland’s debt measurement methods do not fully correspond. In order to counteract excessive debt incursion, a state is required to take not only efficient actions but also ones that are adequate and, to some extent, flexible. This is an expression of acceptance of the EU’s preventive assumptions. However, there is still no full correlation in the methodology of calculating public debt in the EU and the Republic of Poland.

Dismantling Checks and Balances (II): Judges and Prosecutors

2019 ◽  
pp. 96-131
Author(s):  
Wojciech Sadurski
Keyword(s):  
Judicial System ◽  
National Council ◽  
Public Prosecution ◽  
Checks And Balances ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Constitutional Tribunal ◽  
The Common ◽  
Law And Justice ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government

After transforming the Constitutional Tribunal (CT) into an active ally of the government, the Law and Justice (Prawo i Sprawiedliwość (PiS)) party in Poland embarked upon the comprehensive subjection of the entire judicial system to the executive, and in particular to the president of the Republic and the minister of justice/prosecutor general (MJ/PG). This chapter discusses how, for this purpose, the National Council of Judiciary (Krajowa Rada Sądownictwa (KRS)) was packed with the party faithful thanks to a changed system for selecting members of the KRS (they are now directly elected by Parliament, rather than by judges). It also deals with how the effect of the new law on the Supreme Court was a brand new court composition with a pro-PiS majority: this was created by combining early retirement for incumbent judges and increasing the number of seats on the Court. The chief justice’s constitutionally guaranteed term of office has been extinguished. It also looks at another statute, on the common courts, that has strengthened the power of the MJ to control court presidents, and hold judges accountable for their verdicts through a new disciplinary procedure. Finally, the chapter looks at how the prosecutorial system (prokuratura) was merged with that of the MJ, with the MJ becoming the ex officio PG, producing a deeply politicized system of public prosecution.

Federalism Revisited: Constitutional Court Strikes Down New Immigration Act For Formal Reasons

2003 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 71-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nina Arndt ◽  
Rainer Nickel
Keyword(s):  
Majority Vote ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
German States ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Legislative Procedure ◽  
The Republic

On 18 December 2002, one of the major legislative projects of the Schröder Government during its first term of office from 1998 to 2002 failed when the Federal Constitutional Court delivered its judgement in the Immigration Act case. In a split decision, the Court declared the new Immigration Act, the “Gesetz zur Steuerung und Begrenzung der Zuwanderung“ (Act on the Management and Limitation of Immigration) void for formal reasons: It found that the Act did not receive a valid majority vote in the Bundesrat, the chamber of the 16 German states (Länder) that form the Republic. The Court did not have to deal with any questions related to the content of the Act. It discussed only the constitutionality of the legislative procedure.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document