During the last decade the separatist activities of the Catalan nationalists have intensified. Despite the enactment of the Statute of Autonomy in 2006, extending the existing autonomy of the Autonomous Community, Catalonia’s governing political parties strived for total independence. In view of the consistent attitude of the central government in Madrid refusing any concessions on the extension of autonomy or independence, the Autonomous Government of Catalonia (Generalitat) appealed to the institutions of direct democracy, calling twice for a Catalan referendum on independence. In both cases, the Spanish Constitutional Court declared the referendum unlawful. In spite of this, Catalonia declared independence after the referendum of October 1st, 2017, although the effects of the declaration were also suspended – a situation so far unknown to law.

The article studies the evolution process of the primary functions and the position of the prosecution agencies of Podilia in the ‘20s - the beginning of the ‘30s of the XXth century in the government machinery at the stages of introducing the New Economic Policy (the NEP), its rolling back and holding a course for modernization of the industry. The author has carried out the retrospective analysis of the powers of the local prosecution agencies according to the statutory documents and acts approved by the party leadership, used substantive factual information on the activities of the Prosecutor’s Office of the UkrSSR and its regional division - the Prosecutor’s Office of Podilia.

This article aims to answer the question about the legality of the selected measures implemented by the Polish government during the first wave of the coronavirus pandemic, which resulted in constitutional rights and freedom restrictions. The study focuses on examining selected restrictions implemented in the spring of 2020 in the light of the Polish Constitution, especially in the light of Article 31 (3), which defines the premises of limitation of citizens’ rights and freedoms. It indicates the lack of legal basis and incompatibility with constitutional premises of many restrictions. The study further examines the premises of the introduction of the state of emergency, indicating that the government's decision not to impose such a state was legal and why. The study considers legal status from March 13 to May 16, 2020.

The outbreak of the COVID-19 epidemic in the world made it necessary to take action to minimize the negative consequences for human health and life and the economy. Citizens’ political freedoms and rights are among the most important rights in a democratic state. In Poland, the Minister of Health introduced the “state of epidemic” by way of a regulation. The procedure and rank of adopted legal acts raised constitutional doubts from the very beginning. First of all, the failure to introduce one of the constitutionally defined states of emergency, especially a state of natural disaster, which by its nature corresponded the best to the epidemic situation in the country. The author put forward the thesis that the state of the epidemic announced in Poland did not meet the constitutional requirements and that there were no grounds for the introduced restrictions on the freedom and rights of an individual. Legal solutions introduced in selected countries in terms of their constitutionality are also compared.