Hierarchization of the rights and freedoms of a person in light  of the constitutional regulation of the extraordinary measures

Analysis of the regulation of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland of April 2nd, 1997 leads to the conclusion that the provisions of its XIth chapter provide for a hierarchy of the rights and freedoms of a person during a period of introduction of the extraordinary measures. The Polish legislator linked the type of the applied extraordinary measure with the possibility of limitation of certain human rights – a solution not known in international documents. Hence, it established a hierarchy of the human rights during the period of introduction of the extraordinary measures with three levels of protection. The hierarchization of the rights and freedoms of a person in the constitutional provisions regarding the extraordinary measures is not crafted to determine the hierarchic supremacy of some rights above the others, but just a particular level of protection of some of them from the intervention of the state.

At the beginning 2020, the vast majority of countries worldwide were forced to confront and face the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. The rapid spread of this new disease resulted in radical changes in the basic principles of the functioning and organization of states and entire societies. The novel circumstances which both nation states and the international community are facing induce reflection on the need of redefining the right to privacy. This paper aims to answer, whether the current situation will lead to lasting changes in the way privacy is now perceived in Europe and what threats may be associated with the possible changes.

Is Polish Constitution adjusted to the times of crisis? Selected problems and de lege ferenda propositions

The subject of this article is the question whether the Constitution of the Republic of Poland of 1997 provides sufficient guarantees for the continuity of government and cooperation of public authorities in the event of sudden threats such as war, rebellion, natural disaster or terrorist attack. The analysis shows that the Constitution of the Republic of Poland is prepared for standard emergency situations, but does not contain procedures in the event of the worst-case scenarios: necessity of state of emergency during electoral campaign; failure to gather a minimum quorum of 230 deputies for the needs of a session of the parliament; the death of top politicians in the state.

Konstytucja Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej z 2 kwietnia 1997 r. stworzyła możliwość wprowadzenia trzech odmiennych stanów nadzwyczajnych w sytuacji szczególnych zagrożeń. Specjalne przepisy dotyczące stanów nadzwyczajnych zostały określone w trzech odrębnych ustawach, które zostały przyjęte w 2002 r. W latach 2005–2019 w Polsce wystąpiły liczne zdarzenia, które media określały jako klęski żywiołowe. Pomimo że regulacje ustawowe obowiązują od 2002 r. (Dz.U. 2002 nr 62 poz. 558), w Trzeciej Rzeczypospolitej nigdy nie wprowadzono stanu nadzwyczajnego. Posłowie w ramach swojej aktywności parlamentarnej kierowali na przestrzeni V, VI, VII i VIII kadencji zapytania i interpelacje w tej sprawie. Analiza aktywności poselskich związanych ze stanem klęski żywiołowej może być pomocna przy próbie identyfikacji sposobu postrzegania tego stanu nadzwyczajnego przez polityków, a to z kolei pozwoli ustalić przyczyny nieposługiwania się tym instrumentem prawnym przez rządzących.

The author analyzes the threats to state security and citizens that have arisen in recent years in Poland from the point of view of regulating the prerequisites for a state of emergency, trying to answer the question whether they justify the need to change the existing constitutional solutions. The general conclusion, which arises from these considerations, is that the constitution in this area does not require urgent amendment, while changes to the legislation are desirable.