Wyniki wyszukiwania - Biblioteka Nauki

1

Modele pozaparlamentarnej kontroli konstytucyjności prawa

100%

Szymanek J.

|

nr 5(148)

95–116

EN

The article presents models of extra-parliamentary constitutional review of law. The starting point is the methodological discussion of various concepts of the division and types of review, i.a. political vs judicial, strong vs weak, centralized vs decentralized. Most often the constitutional review of law is classified into American-type review (judicial review) and European-type review (review performed by constitutional courts). This dichotomous classification is often replaced with the categories of “dispersed review” and “concentrated review”, which is the most often classification, at the same time clearly expressing the features distinguishing the two review mechanisms. While the American model does not raise serious discussions, the European model — also referred to as Kelsenian or Austrian model — is controversial. It can be subclassified into original (pure) model and its various mutations, referred to as the mixed European model of the constitutional review of law, most often applied in practice. Moreover, other types of review are also applied in Europe, hence the French and the Scandinavian models are also sometimes distinguished. Regardless of the classification, all review models are now being homogenized. This means that the review is performed by the courts (concrete review is introduced), the protection of rights and freedoms of an individual is emphasized, and political consequences of constitutional review are becoming more significant, as a result of which the organ performing the constitutional review becomes a political, active authority within the state.

2

The Head of State’s Constitutional Liability

100%

Grabowska S.

|

2017

|

tom 1 (46)

153–167

EN

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.

3

THE ADEQUACY OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMPLAIN AS AN EXTRAORDINARY MEAN OF HUMAN RIGHTS PROTECTION – COMPARISON OF THE SOLUTIONS OF POLAND AND GERMANY

86%

Wiczanowska H. M.

|

nr 11

5-23

EN

The primary purpose of the presented paper is to conduct comparative analysis of the institution of constitutional complaint within the legal systems of Poland and Germany. Within such analysis the author aims at establishment of an adequate relationship between two main goals of the constitutional complaint, such as: 1. the elimination of unconstitutional provisions and 2. the ensurance of human rights protection within two aforesaid legal systems. The secondary purpose of the article is to make attempt of the resolution of the issue which of the presented purposes shall gain a primacy while constituting an adequate model of the constitutional complaint. For the genuinity of the conducted analysis, the author will take into consideration such determinants as: the adapted model of the constitutional complaint (narrow limited only to legal provisions or wide), conditions of the admissibility of the constitutional complaint as well as competences of the Constitutional Court while hearing a certain constitutional complaint case. Such factors will subsequently be juxtaposed with the objective dataset, such as: yearly number of complaints submitted, yearly number of complaints accepted to the meritorical recognition, percentage of the complaints among all cases heard by the Constitutional Court and the average period of recognition of such complaint. The author will also refer to the level of satisfaction with the constitutional complaints efficiency in particular societies. Moreover the paper will rely upon the dogmatic analysis of the appropriate regulations regarding constitutional complaints in two abovementioned legal systems. The justification of the choice of presented subject comes down to necessity of the revision of the current Polish solutions regarding the constitutional complaint in order to ensure the icreasement of the efficiency of the human rights protection. Subsidiarily, the paper will also refer to the judicial practice of the European Court of Human Rights.

4

The Right to Conscientious Objection as a Constitutional Category: Selected Issues. A Comparative Study of Fundamental Laws and Constitutional Courts’ Jurisprudence

72%

Maroń G.

|

nr 2(78)

163-183

PL

W artykule zaprezentowano rezultaty komparatystycznego studium konstytucji współczesnych państw pod kątem gwarantowanego w nich prawa do sprzeciwu sumienia. Prawo to najczęściej dotyczy służby wojskowej. W pojedynczych przypadkach sprowadza się do innej partykularnej klauzuli sumienia. W kilkunastu konstytucjach przyjmuje postać generalnego prawa do sprzeciwu sumienia. Unormowania konstytucyjne tytułowego prawa są zwykle ogólne. Z rzadka ustrojodawcy określają źródła sprzeciwu sumienia czy warunki skorzystania z prawa do sprzeciwu sumienia, w szczegółach odsyłając do ustaw. Kontrowersyjność tytułowej kategorii prawa tłumaczy jego eksplikatywne zakwestionowanie w kilkunastu ustawach zasadniczych. Praktyka orzecznicza, zwłaszcza sądów konstytucyjnych, pokazuje że normatywny byt i zakres treściowy prawa do sprzeciwu sumienia w danym porządku prawnym niekoniecznie jest prostą konsekwencją postanowień konstytucji. W judykaturze poszczególnych państw zdarza się uznawać konstytucyjny charakter prawa do sprzeciwu sumienia pomimo braku jego wyraźnego wyartykułowania w tekście ustawy zasadniczej, jak i czynić wykładnię zawężającą językowo jednoznacznych przepisów konstytucyjnych w tym względzie.

EN

The article presents the results of a comparative study focusing on the right to conscientious objection in constitutions of modern states. This right is primarily associated with military service. In approximately a dozen constitutions, it stands as an independent, general right to conscientious objection. The constitutional scope of the given right is typically broad, with lawmakers seldom specifying the sources or conditions for its exercise. The contentious nature of the analysed right causes its explicit challenge in several constitutions. Case law, especially that of constitutional courts, reveals that the normative presence and the specifics of the right to conscientious objection within a particular legal system may not necessarily originate directly from constitutional provisions. Court decisions rendered in various countries sometimes attribute a constitutional character to this right, even when the fundamental law does not explicitly articulate it. Conversely, there are occasional restrictive interpretations of unequivocal constitutional provisions regarding conscientious objection.

5

Rola Sądu Konstytucyjnego Federacji Rosyjskiej w wykonywaniu przez Rosję wyroków Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka

58%

Moryc M.

|

nr 1

EN

The article describes accumulation of the conflict between the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights. This process resulted in final implementation by the Russian Federation legal institutions, which legally allow not to implement ECHR’s judgements, alleging them in contradiction of the Russian Constitution. The main role in this process started to perform Russian Constitutional Court (CC). CC, requested by the executive body, may decide that ECHR’s judgment contradicts the Russian Constitution, which would result in lack of possibilities to execute such judgment. This kind of legal regulation is unprecedented among the legal systems of the Council of Europe member states, and poses a serious violation of international treaties, signed by the Russian Federation.

PL

W artykule zostało opisane narastanie konfliktów między Federacją Rosyjską a Europejskim Trybunałem Praw Człowieka. Proces ten skutkował ostatecznie wdrożeniem przez Rosję instrumentów prawnych, pozwalających na niewykonywanie wybranych orzeczeń ETPC pod zarzutem ich niezgodności z rosyjską konstytucją. Główna rola w tym względzie przypadła rosyjskiemu Sądowi Konstytucyjnemu (SK). SK, na wniosek organu władzy wykonawczej, na gruncie obowiązujących przepisów może orzec o niezgodności orzeczenia ETPC z konstytucją FR, co w praktyce uniemożliwia skuteczną egzekucję takiego orzeczenia. Przyjęcie takiego rozwiązania jest niespotykane na gruncie prawodawstwa innych państw członkowskich Rady Europy oraz stanowi istotne pogwałcenie umów międzynarodowych, których Rosja jest stroną.