Temporary impossibility of performing the functions by the Polish President under the Constitution and the new Constitutional Tribunal Act

This paper discusses temporary impossibility of performing the functions by the Polish President. The Polish Constitution defines three kinds of such impossibility. First of all, there are situations when the President may inform about this impossibility, secondly – when s/he cannot do this, and thirdly – the President may be suspended because of being arraigned before the State Tribunal. Each of these situations is considered in the paper, one by one. The author refers, among others, to the grounds on which impossibility of performing the functions by the Polish President is declared and analyses in detail the provisions of the new Constitutional Tribunal Act concerning this issue. The author’s comments are accompanied by related conclusions and suggestions concerning the amendment of both the Polish Constitution and the said act.

On the responsibility of the Speaker of the Sejm – a contribution to the discussion

The Speaker of the Sejm holds a unique political position. It results from the fact that it is a leading body of the Polish Sejm, with a number of competences exceeding the scope of the representative body’s operation. In addition, the Speaker performs the duties of the President of the Republic of Poland in cases specified by the Constitutional Act. The Speaker’s competences were defined very broadly, but he was subsequently not included in the regime of constitutional responsibility. The absence of mechanisms for enforcing the constitutional responsibility of the Speaker of the Sejm is in contradiction with the principles of a democratic state governed by the rule of law, assuming the responsibility of the authorities.

Speaker of the Sejm as a person temporarily performing  the duties of the President – the constitutional dilemmas

The article concentrates on issue of legal status of Marshall of Sejm as a person executing presidential duties by the time when the president for some reasons can not hold his office. The author analyses in details binding legal rules, indicating whether they are useful or whether they are just wrong. The first part of article shows us polish constitutional tradition in presented area. It includes both pre- and post war period. In the second part we can find an analysis of constitutional rules referring to the issue of presidential substitution. The remarks in the article are based on political praxis in Poland. In many cases the author criticizes introduced legal rules. He also formulates many practical conclusions for the future.

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 Committee for its opinion. If the Committee finds the bill unconstitutional and therefore inadmissible, the Speaker can refuse to initiate the legislative procedure. The above regulation 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 article presents the genesis and the analysis of the current regulation of the parliamentary review of the constitutionality of bills in Poland at the very beginning of the legislative 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 convening sessions of the Sejm by its Marshal. The author criticizes the adopted legal solutions, first of all paying attention to the excessive strengthening of the role of the chairman 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, inviting guests and the situation when a sitting cannot be convened for objective reasons.

The Marshal of the Sejm as an Organ Watching Over Peace and Order Within the Sejm – Dilemmas of Theory and Parliamentary Practice

 The article refers to the status of the Marshal of the Sejm, especially with regard to his position as a „guard of the Sejm”. The Author characterizes Marshal competences connected with watching over peace and order within the Sejm, both in terms of legal status and parliamentary practice. In the context of the practice of the previous term of office of the Sejm, he draws attention to the numerous cases of the Marshal using his procedural powers in a way that favours deputies of the fraction represented by the Marshal and their abuse against opposition deputies.

Legal Consequences of the Addressee’s Failure to Reply to an Interpellation or of Replying Late

The article presents the essence of parliamentary interpellations, refers to the obligation incumbent on the addressee to provide an answer within the time limit indicated in the Constitution. The author is of the opinion that not replying or replying after the deadline is a constitutional tort and is subject to liability before the State Tribunal. The currently occurring, rather negative parliamentary practice necessitates appropriate amendments to the Parliament’s Rules of Procedure. These changes should also cover the issues of abuse of the right of interpellation and enquiry by.

This article is devoted to the issue of death as a premise for vacating the office of President of the Republic of Poland. The Constitution of the Republic of Poland comprehensively regulates the institution of substitution of the President of the Republic of Poland, specifying the legal forms of its execution and indicating the Marshals (of the Sejm and the Senate) as entities authorized to carry out the duties of the head of state. In the event of the occurrence of the death of the President, doubts arise as to the possibility of implementing civilian regulations at the time of triggering the procedure of substitution of the President provided for in Art. 131 of the Constitution. The analysis carried out in the article is aimed at answering the question of whether the Marshal of the Sejm (on whom the duty to assume the duties of head of state is incumbent), functioning in the field of constitutional law, is bound by the regulations applicable in principle on civil law grounds.