- Year of publication: 2019
- Source: Show
- Pages: 439-459
- DOI Address: -
The author describes mutual, constitutional relations between the Senate and the head of state, and asks questions about the perspectives of their modification. The political events of 1989 leading to the reinstatement of a single-member head of state and Senate in Poland made their restitution closely related. At present, the competence and func- tional dependence of these bodies is low. The President and the Senate share a common view on the constant presence in the doctrinal and political discussion of the problem of changing their political position.
The analysis focuses on the relations between the presidential and semi-presidential system of government and the model of control of legal norms. The authors formulate question, is there a correlation between these government systems and the model of constitutional review of the law? The authors argue that there is no such dependence. They justify that the system of government is created independently of the model of law constitutional re- view. They justify why it is and what are the consequences for the system of government.
This article analyzes tasks and competences of the President of the Republic of Poland as the guardian of sovereignty and security of the state. The author recognizes major importance of the head of state in that field. The President is the supreme commander of the Armed Forces and exercises powers connected with this function. The President also exercises a number of other powers, including those of an extraordinary nature (in- troduction of martial law and the state of emergency, declaring a time of war, declaring a general or partial mobilization). The author of the article underlines the necessity of cooperation of the President and the Council of Ministers in the field of the state securi- ty. It results from the fact that some powers are subject of countersignature of the Prime Minister or are exercised at the request of the Council of Ministers or its members (the Prime Minister, the Minister of National Defense).
The Constitution provides the possibility of appointing the ministers in two categories – ministers in charge of the government administration department and ministers per- forming tasks assigned by the President of the Council of Ministers. The conditions for holding the office define the rights and duties of a minister. While analyzing them, it is necessary to highlight those resulting from the fact that ministers are members of the collective executive body as well as those related to the exercise of office. The status of “departmental” ministers and that of ministers without portfolio are equivalent with- in the cabinet. The Act on the Council of Ministers does not define separate rights, does not impose separate obligations resulting from membership in the Council of Ministers, and the obligations toward the Sejm and its bodies remain the same.
According to the Standing Orders of the Sejm the Speaker of the Sejm, after seeking the opinion of the Presidium of the Sejm, may refer any bills which raise doubts as to their consistency with law, in particular with the Constitution, to the Legislative Commit- tee for its opinion. If the Committee finds the bill unconstitutional and therefore in- admissible, the Speaker can refuse to initiate the legislative procedure. The above reg- ulation has for many years raised doubts as to its consistency with the Constitution, in particular the constitutional right to legislative initiative (Article 118) or the rule of considering statutes in three readings by the Sejm (Article 119, Article 120). The arti- cle presents the genesis and the analysis of the current regulation of the parliamenta- ry review of the constitutionality of bills in Poland at the very beginning of the legis- lative procedure, the controversies that arise on that background and the discussion on that issue among the representative of the doctrine as well as conclusions de lege lata and de lege ferenda.
This article provides an analysis of selected problems regarding the mechanism for con- vening sessions of the Sejm by its Marshal. The author criticizes the adopted legal solu- tions, first of all paying attention to the excessive strengthening of the role of the chair- man of the first chamber of parliament in this respect. In his opinion, doubts must be raised by the fact that under the regulations, the right to convene meetings of the Sejm has got only the Marshal, whereas such entities such like parliamentary factions, as well as the President and the government, are formally deprived of it. In addition, he also shows the dilemmas that may arise in the course of applying those provisions in systemic practice. M. in here, he indicates the problem of setting dates of a sitting of the Sejm, in- viting guests and the situation when a sitting cannot be convened for objective reasons.
The main goal of article is to evaluate the functioning of a redraft of a legislative propos- al in the Polish legal order, particularly whether this mechanism may be considered as making the legislative procedure more flexible and improving the quality of the legisla- tive works of the Polish Parliament, or whether the constitutional shape of a redraft and its use leads to conclusions that this solution is misguided and negatively affects parlia- mentary legislative proceedings. Both normative analysis and systemic practice lead to the conclusion that the regulation of a redraft by the Sejm’s Rules cannot be considered op- timal. From my point of view, it is necessary to make such corrections to Art. 36 par. 1a- 1c that will prevent from abusing this instrument. However, the critical assessment of the redraft standardization does not change the generally positive assessment of the in- stitution itself, because the specific self-correction of the proposal, often resulting from the reflection of the initiator of the legislative proceedings (resulting from both internal and external factors), is fully desirable, primarily from the perspective of implementing the postulate of the legal system coherence and its completeness.
© 2017 Adam Marszałek Publishing House. All rights reserved.
Projekt i wykonanie Pollyart