The paper aims to introduce the concept of constitutional liability of the President, and the institutions of the President’s constitutional liability. The author presents the liability and its relations with other types of head of state’s liabilities. The presented analysis includes all European countries. 

The paper is dealing with the constitutional and historical importance of Act I. of 1946. In 1946 Hungary has changed its form of government. The passage of Act I of 1946 has defined Hungary’s form of government as a republic. In addition to the creation of a republic, the legislation provided powers for the president of the Hungarian Republic. Moreover, the Preamble of Act I. of 1946 was the first document in the Hungarian constitutional history which summarized and declared the most important natural and inalienable rights of the citizens.

The subject of this article is the character and meaning of the head of state’s liability. The author notices that this institution is an important factor that determines the systemic and legal position of the supreme body in the country, and adopting different solutions in this matter may make the position of heads of state significantly different, even if they seem to have a similar character. This relation has been shown on the example of regulations of liability of the heads of state in Monaco and Liechtenstein. In both countries, there is an almost identical manner of appointing to the office of a head of state and the scope of their authorities. However, the matter of liability has been regulated in a completely different way in these two countries.

The subject of the article is to identify factors and conditions that determined the system of government of the IInd Republic of Poland under the Small Constitution of 1919. This act served as a temporary constitution until the March Constitution of 1921 came into force, which happened completely only at the end of 1922. Under the Small Constitution there has been made an attempt to introduce the system of supremacy of the parliament. It turned out to be impossible because of high authority of the head of state – Józef Piłsudski, who also served as the Commander-in-Chief. Therefore, the system of balance between the Legislative Sejm and the Chief of State was shaped in the political practice.

This paper seeks to address the issues related with the official acts of the President in selected contemporary Polish constitutions. For this purpose, a preliminary analysis of the position of the head of state was conducted in respect of the March Constitution, April Constitution and the current Constitution of the Republic of Poland of 1997. The nature of the official acts of the President has been assessed for the system position of the head of state. It also identifies the nature and characteristics of the official acts of the President.

Functions of the President of the Republic of Poland in Connection with Poland’s Membership in the European Union

The article aims to analyze the functions of the President of the Republic of Poland in connection with Poland’s membership in the EU. The discussed issues are important due to the dynamic nature of this process and the federalist tendencies in the EU. They cause that the issues of compliance of the deepening of the European integration process with the constitution and issues related to the increasingly significant scope of the integration process in the context of the sovereignty of nation states become particularly important. Therefore, the role of the President of the Republic of Poland in this process, as the guardian of the constitution and state sovereignty, requires analysis. The Republic of Poland’s membership in the European Union makes it necessary to take a new look not only at the system of government but also at the tasks of the executive branch.

The Constitutional Position of the Federal President in Switzerland

The aim of the article is to define the constitutional position of the Federal President in Switzerland in the context of the relationship between him and the Federal Council. It discusses the origins of the institution, the mode of election and the scope of competences of the Federal President. As it results from the analysis, the Federal President exercises the scope of competences assigned to him only as the chairman of the Federal Council. The Federal President does not have any authoritative competences that would result from the constitution. He only performs ceremonial and organizational functions that enable the proper performance of tasks by the Federal Council. Thus, it should be recognized that in Switzerland there is a collegial head of state, which is the Federal Council. It performs the constitutional functions of the government and the head of state, which are separated in other countries.

The Criminal Responsibility of Vladimir Putin: the Jurisdictional Immunities for Heads of State in the Context of International Crimes

The article addresses the question of accountability for international crimes. An attention is given to Vladimir Putin, the President of the Russian Federation who is allegedly the most responsible for the crimes committed by the Russian forces in Ukraine after 2022. A comparative analysis of the forms of prosecution of crimes in the context of the immunities of heads of state leads to some conclusion. First, there is an option to judge the Russian President before the International Criminal Court and a tribunal established by the UN even during his duties as the head of state. Second, possibilities of prosecution increase if Vladimir Putin ceases to perform his duties as the president. Then hybrid tribunals and national courts under a formula of universal jurisdiction could indict the Russian president. However, the trial and punishment of Russian high officials is problematic due to the superpower status of the Russian Federation.