- Year of publication: 2013
- Source: Show
- Pages: 291-296
- DOI Address: -
The government in the Republic of Slovenia is organized on the principle of separation of powers into legislative, executive and judicial branches. Judicial power is exercised by the courts. The judiciary is autonomous and independent. The courts administer justice according to the Constitution and law, as well as according to international agreements and treaties in force. Judges and lay assessors participate in the administration of justice in conformity with the law. In the Republic of Slovenia the administration of justice is carried out by 44 district courts, 11 regional courts, 4 higher courts: labour courts and social court, Higher Labour and Social Court, the Administrative Court of the Republic of Slovenia and the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia. In addition to courts with general jurisdiction, there are 4 labour courts and 1 social court. There are responsible for ruling on individual and collective labour-related disputes and on social disputes. For second-degree ruling the Higher Labour and Social Court is responsible.
Changing of the constitution is usually followed by using a well-defined procedure. Few European countries allow the possibility of adopting a limited exception to the Constitution. Such a law introduced in 2012, Belgium, despite the lack of appropriate legislation and practice in this field. Belgian exception to the constitution temporarily modifies the procedure for changing the constitution. This involves the withdrawal of typical Nordic countries requiring approval of amendment of the constitution by two term of the parliament. Other elements of the procedure for amending the Belgian Constitution, such as equal rights of the House of Representatives and the Senate, and increased quorum and majority required for approval of amendment, remained unchanged. Validity exception of the Belgian Constitution ends with the term of the parliament elect-ed in 2010.
The object of this dissertation is to present the role of institution of complaint referred to in Art. 63 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland of April 2 nd , 1997 and in Art. 227 of the act of June 14 th , 1960 – Administrative Procedure Code. One of the more significant objects of complaints can be the violation of law and order. In accordance with Art. 7 of the Constitution, public authorities shall be acting on the basis and within the limits of the law. Similar rule is also included in Art. 6 of Administrative Procedure Code and also in Art. 120 of the act of August 29 th , 1997 – Tax Ordinance. In a democratic country governed my law, public authorities can only be established on a legal basis and legal regulations will specify their tasks and competences, mode of conduct, and define the limits of their activities. The obligation of public authorities is therefore abiding the law, which means undertaking any activities solely on the basis and within the binding legal standards.
The article concentrates on the issue of regulations of legislative proceedings in the Sejm in the scope of the right of Members of Parliament to put forward amendments to government bills. Analysis of the provisions of the Constitution of April 2, 1997 and of the Standing Orders of the Sejm of 1992 proves that the current regulations, both with reference to the so-called regular bills, as well as the draft of the budget act, create great possibilities for Members of Parliament to make changes to the government legislative proposals during the stages of the first and the second reading of a bill. This creates a serious threat to the material integrity of the projects, as well as limits the effectiveness of the policy conducted by the government. The previous amendments to the Standing Orders of the Sejm made in order to limit the influence of MP’s amendments on the contents of government projects proved to be not effective enough; therefore, the Author calls for the further modernization of legislative proceedings aimed at guaranteeing effective protection of government projects against their deformation during the legislative proceedings in the Sejm.
The purpose of this publication is to present the scope of the parliamentary immunity in the Polish legal system. The paper examines both non-accountability and inviolability of the members of parliament from four different angles: ratione loci (where the protection is granted), ratione temporis (when the protection starts and ends), ratione personae (to whom it extends) and ratione materiae (what acts are covered by the protection). Polish regulations are presented with numerous references to the legal systems of other democratic countries, especially those which are members of the European Union. The paper advances a thesis that the scope of the parliamentary immunity in Poland is relatively broad and consequently, it may be argued that some elements of this privilege maybe taken away from the Polish Members of Parliament without affecting their freedom of action within the scope of parliamentary mandate.
In May 2013 the party of the Polish Solidarity with Zbigniew Ziobro (further called „SP”) announced the project of changes in the current Constitution of the Republic of Poland from 2 April 1997 (further called „Constitution RP”). This project was presented in the form of consolidated text of the constitution which obtained the name of „New Constitution of the Republic of Poland” (further called „Project SP”). The Project SP proposes amendments or repeals of 83 articles of the Constitution RP (it makes a bit more than a third of its all articles) as well as addition of nine articles, not always completely new as for their solutions. The Project SP proposes introducing changes in the Constitution of RP covering in particular: system of legal sources, list of general rules of the system of state, forms of direct exercising power by the nation, especially introducing the presidential system of government, which mean far-reaching reforms of constitutional system of authorities. The article focuses the attention on their analysis and assesses them from the viewpoint of their democratisation, rules of legal state and contributing to rising effectiveness of activities of authorities while comparing them with regulations introduced by the Constitution of 1997. The estimate of proposals of constitutional system of RP covered by Project SP is not to be unidirectional – only approving or only critical. Some of these proposals deserve a positive mark, others arouse estimative dilemmas due to their loose ends or controversial character; finally there are those which cannot result in other than negative marks.
The topic of this article is the constitutional responsibility of the President of Serbia and the powers of the parliament and the Constitutional Court in this regard. The procedures governing the President for pulling constitutional responsibility begins with the submission of the proposal in Parliament on the indictment of President of having committed a constitutional delict and carrying preliminary proceedings by the committee and adoption by Parliament of a resolution on the adoption or rejection of the application. When determining and adjudicating authority is the Parliament, a group of deputies initiated the proceedings. Then the major procedure is carried out and shall be tested the charges against President. In addition, the committed by the President of the constitutional delict is required the Constitutional Court decision. At the end of voting takes place on the submission of the President from office because of committing a constitutional delict and order early elections for President. The decision is made by a resolution of Parliament.
This article aims to highlight the importance of the regulation of the official language not only for the state authorities but also for the individual as a guarantee of fulfillment of its constitutional rights and freedoms.The Polish Constitution of 1997 introduces in Article XXVII the principle of officialdom of Polish language, giving it for the first time since the nineteenth century such a strong legal protection. This principle was developed subsequently in The Polish Language Act in 1999 regulating the use of Polish language as a national language.The right to use Polish language in public and in private as the hallmark of citizenship should be protected by the State. Mother tongue as an element of national culture forms part of the national identity and therefore of the individual. The lack of obligation to know languages other than the official protects citizens from having to comply with European Law that has not been translated into Polish. The individual may also allege to the breach of Article XXVII of the Constitution when applied to the law that was interpreted in violation of language norms. Outside the protection conferred by Article XXVII of the Constitution there are now, as a rule, private law relations. It is due to the assignment to Polish language the status of an official language at the constitutional level and not of a national language. The introduction of the principle of officialdom in Article XXVII of the Constitution of the Polish language implies an obligation of the State to protect individuals that do not speak in that language. It is a condition for the realization of, inter alia, the right to justice. Article XXVII of the Constitution, the second sentence, as a guarantee regulation, confirms the inviolability of national minority rights resulting from ratified international agreements. Therefore, it correlates with the principle of the protection of national and ethnic minorities without giving the possibility to establish in Poland Polish language other than as the official language.
© 2017 Adam Marszałek Publishing House. All rights reserved.
Projekt i wykonanie Pollyart