Two models of relationship between freedom and security

The subject matter of the article revolves around two classical models of relationship between freedom and security contained in the theories formulated by T. Hobbes and J. Locke, as well as their conceptual development in the theories by H. Kelsen and J. Rawls. The model presented by Hobbes accentuates the primacy of security, whereas the one proposed by Locke, the primacy of the rights of an individual. A critical analysis of those models illustrates that one may not interpret the necessity of existence of a political power, or the requirement to guarantee the rights of individuals in an absolutist way. The validity of Hobbes’s model is limited to the statement regarding the necessity to establish a „decision-centre” ensuring „collective security”. Locke’s model, on the other hand, is not established upon the construction of an „ideal constitution” but rather it points to democratic forms of guarantying individual rights. This does not mean that one should acknowledge the absolute primacy of legislature. In both the theories proposed by Kelsen and Rawls this function may be fulfilled by constitutional judicature. While the model established by Hobbes is appropriate for the descriptive conceptualisation of constitution, the one offered by Locke serves the prescriptive formulation of this concept.

Ecological security is a state in which air quality compliant with the standards of air protection is ensured for members of society. An air quality plan is a legal instrument serving the restoration of air quality to the level required by law as soon as possible in case of the emergence and the persistence of exceedances of such standards. Members of society fearing the influence of bad quality air on their health have the right to demand judicial control of the effectiveness of such a plan. The possibility of demanding the restoration of ecological security in such a way results from the guarantees given them at the constitutional and EU level. National courts in Poland, which is an EU Member State, are obliged to respect those guarantees.

The article aims to draw attention to such an administrative procedure in which a citizen’s right to control administrative decisions issued by an administrative authority is guaranteed. This control is carried out mainly in the course of an instance examination of a case. The analysis of solutions in this respect against the background of constitutional guarantees will allow for the answer of whether legal solutions guarantee the right of an individual to hear an administrative case. The analysis of these solutions is based on the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Tribunal and administrative courts and the views contained in the literature.