In December 2017 and January 2018, the Sejm and Senate, thanks to the votes of the deputies of ruling party Law and Justice, passed hugely controversial law amending inter alia Polish Electoral Code. Its adoption was opposed by the parliamentary opposition, by the electoral administration bodies and by many experts, however unsuccessfully. The enactment of this law destabilises the electoral system without a clear or evident need and treats the electoral code as a political instrument. Secondly, it does not provide the sufficient time for adaptation (vacatio legis), which may jeopardise free and fair local elections and the stability of the political system. Thirdly, the bill contains numerous unclear provisions and is in many parts written in a careless and contradictory way. Such amendments do not correspond with the European standards, described in the Venice Commission’s Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters.

Using data from a nationally representative survey in Poland, this study looks at the links between post-election attitudes, ideology and conspiratorial distrust toward public sphere. The reference point is an argument made by Joseph Uscinski and Joseph Parent. They provide evidence that conspiracy theories are more popular among election losers in the United States. Data presented in the article shows a limitation of the argument and the special role of anti-system party in the Polish parliamentary election of 2015. Therefore, the more comprehensive understanding of conspiracy theories within the field of political science is discussed.

It is without any doubt that one of the most important elements of every democratic political system is a Parliament, that is, a collective authority elected in direct elections, which is simultaneously an emanation of will of citizens as a sovereign. Over the years of the technological development of societies and evolution of the economic cooperation amongst states, its role and scope of responsibilities have gradually grown. The European Parliament is one of the key elements of the institutional system of the European Union, and thus, the only body, the composition of which is elected in direct election. This body, as a forum for universal representation by the elected deputies from the member states, brings together views and positions not only of the representatives but also of their electorate. The parliament is also an expression of the multinational EU community, its voice and its desire to have influence on the fate of the entire EU.
This article presents the evolution of the European Parliament and of the election law concerning this body, since its formation as an institution of the European Union until now. The purpose of this article is to present changes which have taken place in the EU legislation in respect of the electoral law, on the basis of which members of the parliament are elected, since the formation of the EP. The main subject of this article covers following issues: how the evolution process of the parliament has looked like over the years, how its position in the institutional architecture of the EU has been evolving and how it has been endeavoured to harmonize electoral procedures to this body over the years. The article is about the evolutionary political position of the EP. The article focuses on selected aspects of unification of the electoral procedure for the election to the EP due to their path-breaking character and importance of the procedure being currently in force.

The aim of the text is the analysis of the tasks and activities of the municipal self-government during the organization of the 2020 election of the President in Poland during the period from the beginning of February to May 10, 2020, when, due to the development of the pandemic, the process of preparing the election took a different course. The study is based on documents and five in-depth expert interviews conducted with persons associated with the organization of the elections. This publication draws attention to the lack of knowledge about various aspects of the pandemic, the protraction of the decision-making process, the lack of cooperation, and citizens’ fears.