Nowa wersja platformy, zawierająca wyłącznie zasoby pełnotekstowe, jest już dostępna.
Przejdź na https://bibliotekanauki.pl
Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników

Znaleziono wyników: 32

Liczba wyników na stronie
first rewind previous Strona / 2 next fast forward last
Wyniki wyszukiwania
Wyszukiwano:
w słowach kluczowych:  executive power
help Sortuj według:

help Ogranicz wyniki do:
first rewind previous Strona / 2 next fast forward last
1
Content available Idea kolegialnej władzy wykonawczej
100%
EN
Montesquieu’s idea of the tripartite system already expressed a concern with preventing one power from dominating excessively. Another argument for the collegial nature of power is the concern with the continuation of state authorities at the time of crisis (e.g. the tragedy in Smoleñsk). The idea of collegial executive power emerged already in antiquity as evidenced by the two kings in Sparta, the collegiums of archons in Athens, two consuls in the Roman Republic, or the system of tetrarchy, initiated by Diocletian. At present we have the ‘rotating presidency’ in Bosnia or the French principle of ‘cohabitacion’.
|
2015
|
tom 2015 (38)(4)
54-66
EN
The article poses a question about the existence of the rule of separation of powers in the EU institutional system, as it is suggested by the wording of the treaties. The analysis led to the conclusion, that in the EU institutional system there are three separated functions (powers) assigned to different institutions. The Council and the European Parliament are legislative powers, the Commission and the European Council create a “divided executive”. The Court of Justice is a judicial power. The above mentioned institutions gained strong position within their main functions (legislative, executive, judicial), but the proper mechanisms of checks and balances have not been developed, especially in the relations between legislative and executive power. These powers do not limit one another in the EU system. In the EU there are therefore three separated but arbitrary powers – because they do not limit and balance one another, and are not fully controlled by the member states.
EN
The aim of the article is to analyze the constitutional position of the government in the Estonian political system. The parliamentary system determines the shape of the relation between the chief state authorities. A peculiar feature of Estonian governments is that they are usually formed as a coalition and are easily changed. Nonetheless, the whole political system should be regarded as stable. Currently Estonia is an example of a state that successfully applied information and communication technology to public administration. In particular the individual governments are actively working to mainstream the digitalization issue.
5
Content available remote Legislatywa i egzekutywa w prezydenckich i półprezydenckich systemach rządów
83%
EN
The article deals with the issue of the relationship between the legislative and the executive powers under the presidential and semi-presidential systems of government. The starting point is the following general remark. While the presidential system is characterized by a consistent or complete separation of powers, the semi-presidential system — being typically mixed with a parliamentary system — treats the principle of division of powers in a less restrictive way, allowing — just like a parliamentary system — various kinds of exceptions to the rigid separation of powers. Consequently, in both of these systems the relationships between the legislature and the executive are arranged somewhat differently. Under the presidential system these relationships are kept to a minimum, and the collision between the legislature and the executive occurs episodically and mainly in the context of competition between them, whereas under the semi-presidential system various kinds of contacts between the legislative and the executive are acceptable and more frequent. While the presidential system is generated by competition between powers, the semi-presidential (and parliamentary) systems is based on the idea of cooperation of powers. Thus, under the general idea of cooperation the legislature and the executive much more likely enter into various kinds of arrangements (eg. a legislative initiative of the government, the procedure for holding the government politically responsible). It should, however, be noted that both described systems of government in its pure form are rare. Clear presidential system is in fact the political system of the United States, while the proper semi-presidential system exists in the French Fifth Republic. All other systems, conventionally classifi ed as one or the other category, are in fact more or less departure from them and rather form a wide range of neo-presidential or para-presidential regimes.
6
71%
PL
Artykuł podejmuje problematykę rządu w Europie Środkowo-Wschodniej, rozumianego jako jeden z podmiotów władzy wykonawczej, powoływany przez organ przedstawicielski, na przykładzie trzech państw, tj. Polski, Czech i Słowacji. Państwa te łączy wspólna, niełatwa historia, przyjęty po 1989 r. system rządów, wzajemne sąsiedztwo, zbieżne interesy. Funkcjonujący w tych państwach model egzekutywy statuuje Polskę, Czechy i Słowację w gronie państw o parlamentarno-gabinetowym systemie rządów. Obok prezydenta wybieranego w wyborach bezpośrednich, istnieje kolegialne ciało-rząd, na którego czele stoi premier. Rząd z premierem na czele jest de facto podmiotem o największym zasobie władzy i zasadniczym wpływie na politykę kraju, tak w wymiarze krajowym, jak i zagranicznym.
EN
The article deals with the issue of government in Central and Eastern Europe, understood as one of the executive branch entities, appointed by the representative body, on the example of three countries, the Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia. These countries are joined by a common, difficult history, a system of government adopted after 1989, mutual neighborhood, convergent interests. The executive model functioning in these countries sets Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia in the group of states with a parliamentary- cabinet system of government. In addition to the president elected in direct elections, there is a collegial body-government headed by the prime minister. The government with the prime minister is de facto the subject with the greatest resource of power and a fundamental influence on the country’s policy, both in the national and foreign dimensions.
EN
The opinion refers to the procedure of the appointment of the Council of Ministers under the basic procedure and the so-called reserve procedures provided for in the Polish Constitution. The author cites the constitutional principle of legalism, and the directive of cooperation to show the assumptions of the parliamentary-cabinet system. The analysis considers the procedure for the election of the Prime Minister in view of the prerogatives of the President and the powers of the Sejm depending on the mode of appointment of the new Council of Ministers. The opinion indicates that the President’s designation of the Prime Minister in the primary procedure is not arbitrary, and the selection must respect the Sejm’s majority. On the other hand, in the case of the selection of the Prime Minister by the Sejm under the reserve procedure, it does not imply automatic assumption of office, since it is necessary for the President to first issue a nomination order and take the oath of office from the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers.
EN
This opinion aims to answer the question regarding the beginning of the operation of the newly elected “parliamentary” Council of Ministers under Article 154 para. 3 of the Polish Constitution. The scope of competences of the President of the Republic in the process of appointing the Council of Ministers under the emergency procedure is analyzed in detail. The author’s position is that the President is obliged to immediately take the oath of office from the newly elected Prime Minister and Ministers and issue a decision on the appointment of the Council of Ministers consistent with the contents of the Sejm’s resolution on the election of the Prime Minister and of the Council of Ministers.
EN
The subject of the analysis is an attempt to answer the question of whether the election of the Prime Minister by the Sejm under Article 154 para. 3 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland means that the President automatically assumes office, and whether, if this provision is applied, the President takes the oath of office only from members of the Council of Ministers or also from the Prime Minister. The author states that Deputies are the representatives of the Nation, while the President serves as the highest representative of the Republic of Poland, but does not represent the Nation, which determines the competence of these bodies. The relationships between the legislative and executive powers presented in the analysis illustrate the principles of the parliamentary-cabinet system in Poland and explain the significance of these powers in the different modes of appointment of the Prime Minister.
EN
The opinion presents the problem of the election of the Prime Minister in the modes provided by the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. The differences between the parliamentary-cabinet system adopted in Poland and the presidential system, shown at the outset, are intended to give an idea of the powers of the President and the Sejm in the aforementioned systems of government. The procedure for the creation of a new Council of Ministers is analyzed in detail, with the author drawing attention to the so-called reserve procedure provided for in Article 154 para. 3 of the Constitution. This regulation orders the President to appoint the Prime Minister elected by the Sejm and, upon his request, the other members of the government, and to take the oath of office from them, whereas, according to the author, the President’s refusal in this regard would constitute a violation of the Constitution meeting the conditions of a constitutional tort.
PL
Pierwszym etapem prac nad przygotowaniem Konstytucji Rzeczpospolitej Polskiej z dnia 2 kwietnia 1997 r. było wniesienie projektów w trybie określonym w ustawie konstytucyjnej z dnia 23 kwietnia 1992 r. Ostatecznie wniesiono 8 projektów, przygotowanych przez prezydenta RP, członków Zgromadzenia Narodowego oraz grupę obywateli. W omawianych projektach przedstawiono różnorodne propozycje dotyczące pozycji rządu i funkcjonowania władzy wykonawczej. Natomiast odnośnie regulacji trybu powoływania ministrów, zakresu ich kompetencji oraz odpowiedzialności indywidualnej i solidarnej członków rządu zgłoszone projekty były zbliżone. W zasadniczej części treść omawianych projektów nie odbiegała od norm wyrażonych w Małej konstytucji, wprowadzała natomiast pewne modyfikacje istniejących rozwiązań. Główne różnice pomiędzy projektami dotyczyły kwestii trybu działania Rady Ministrów oraz określania kompetencji ministrów. Omawiane projekty były przedmiotem dalszych prac w Komisji Konstytucyjnej Zgromadzenia Narodowego i stały się podstawą do opracowania statusu ministra w Konstytucji RP z dnia 2 kwietnia 1997 r.
EN
The first stage of work over the Constitution of the Republic of Poland passed on 2 April, 1997, was introducing the Constitution Projects according to procedure regulated in Constitution-Preparing Law of 1992. In result, there were 8 Constitional Projects, introduced by the President of the Republic of Poland, members of National Assembly and group of citizens. In those projects were many proposals of legal regulations concerning the government and the model of executive power. However the legal regulations included in those projects concerning appointing of ministers, their competences and form of individual ministerial responsibility as well as cabinet collective responsibility were similar. Most of the regulations concerning ministers included in those projects were not different from the rules of the Small Constitution of 1992, although some changes were introduced. The main issues were the way of government work and the way to determine the competences of ministers. Those projects were used in further works of Constitutional Commission and were the foundation for the process of forming the final Constitution regulations placing the minister in the Constitution of the Republic of Poland passed on 2 April, 1997.
EN
The paper explores selected issues related to the possibility of establishing a selfgovernment civil service in Poland. The analysis was carried out from the perspective of recognizing selfgovernment administration (public administration at the level of local government) as public administration conceived in terms of formal and doctrinal assignment of public administration being part of executive power in the classical triad of power division. Empirical data were demonstrated illustrating the characteristics of appointments as the basis of the employment relationship in the civil service corps, and periodically of the local government employees, as a factor stabilizing staff fluctuation in public administration. The main objective was to find an answer, on the basis of the collected data, to the research question whether local government administration should become a permanent element of professional public administration as an element of the civil service corps.
13
67%
PL
Public administration in the democratic state of law can be analyzed from two perspectives: legal-normative and socio-normative. According to the first perspective, public administration is an abstract impersonal model of the executive power, while according to the other – a social space or environment, in which social activities are undertaken by public officials. These two perspectives are not competitive but complementary.
PL
Niniejszy artykuł jest próbą wskazania relacji normatywnych między członami władzy wykonawczej, którą w Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej sprawują prezydent i Rada Ministrów. Relacje porządkujące SKBN, w skład którego wchodzi m.in. wzmiankowana dwuczłonowa egzekutywa, muszą być tak określone, żeby system funkcjonował optymalnie. Ponieważ jednym z zadań realizowanych przez SKBN, zapewniający ciągłość podejmowania decyzji i działań dla utrzymania bezpieczeństwa narodowego, jest realizowanie czynności związanych z kierowaniem obroną państwa, w niniejszym opracowaniu wskazano relacje normatywne zachodzące między prezydentem, a Radą Ministrów, w tych stanach funkcjonowania państwa, w których współpraca między tymi organami uwypukla się najwyraźniej. W związku z tym, że wyraźnie, konstytucyjnie określoną kompetencją Prezydenta dotyczącą bezpośrednio bezpieczeństwa państwa jest także wprowadzanie stanu wojennego i wyjątkowego, to na tych dwóch stanach skupiono się w niniejszym opracowaniu. W opracowaniu wskazano także na możliwość – w sytuacji braku transparentnie określonych relacji – pojawiania się sporów kompetencyjnych i zawiłości (negatywnie wpływających na optymalne funkcjonowanie SKBN, związanych ze sprawowaniem władzy wykonawczej przez dwa „niezależne” organy konstytucyjne).
EN
This article is an attempt to identify the normative relations between the decision-making members of executive power, which is base in the Republic of Poland on the Polish President and the Council of Ministers. Relations ordering national security management system (NSMS), which includes the mentioned two-man executive must be so defined that the system functioned optimally. One of the tasks performed by NSMS, to ensure continuity of decisions and actions for the maintenance of national security, is to pursue activities related to management of state defense. Therefore, in this article was noted, normative relations between the president and the Council of Ministers, in the state of functioning of the state, during which (depending on circumstances) president cooperates with the other member of the dualistic executive (martial law). Constitutionally defined competence of the president regarding the direct security of the state is also introducing a state of emergency. These two states devoted predominant part of the article, a "starting point" for discussion was the "guardian of sovereignty." It should be clear that the two above-mentioned states of emergency relating directly to the cooperation of president with other authorities. In this study it was also an attempt to present the possibility - in the absence of transparently specific relationship - the appearance of conflicts of competence and complexities (negatively affecting the optimal functioning of NSMS, related to the exercise of executive power by the two "independent" constitutional bodies).
PL
Artykuł ma na celu analizę funkcji Prezydenta RP w związku z członkostwem RP w UE. Poruszana problematyka ma istotne znaczenie z uwagi na dynamiczny charakter tego procesu oraz na tendencje federalistyczne w UE. Powodują one, iż szczególnie istotne stają się kwestie zgodności pogłębiania procesu integracji europejskiej z konstytucją oraz zagadnienia związane z coraz bardziej znaczącym zasięgiem procesu integracji w kontekście suwerenności państw narodowych. Dlatego też analizy wymaga rola Prezydenta RP w tym procesie jako strażnika konstytucji oraz suwerenności państwa. Członkostwo Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej w Unii Europejskiej powoduje, iż konieczne jest nowe spojrzenie nie tylko na system rządów, ale również na zadania organów władzy wykonawczej.
EN
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.
|
2016
|
nr 5 (33)
111-124
PL
Artykuł pokazuje, iż prokuratura jako organ pozakonstytucyjny podlega wpływom politycznym. Autorka prezentuje, jak wygląda podporządkowanie prokuratury w Polsce i innych krajach Unii Europejskiej. Wskazuje, iż zapoczątkowana w 2010 r. reforma prokuratury i rozłączenie funkcji prokuratora generalnego i ministra sprawiedliwości nie przyniosło oczekiwanych rezultatów, ponieważ reforma Prokuratury nie została zakończona. Również nie wzmocniła pozycji procesowej proukratora generalnego, ale ją osłabiła. Ustawa przyniosła bowiem wiele przepisów, które z jednej strony były przyczynkiem do niezależności prokuratury, a z drugiej strony narzędziem kontroli nad prokuraturą (art. 10e i 10f), czyniąc tę niezależność iluzoryczną. Dlatego zdaniem autorki, należy dać szanse nowej regulacji, mimo zastrzeżeń. Realizacja w praktyce ustawy z 2016 r. ma doprowadzić do odzyskania przez proukratora generalnego silnej pozycji zarówno wobec podległych prokuratorów, jak i organów zewnętrznych.
EN
An experiment with the subjection of the prosecution to the executive. The article proves that the prosecution as an non-constitutional authority is subjected to political influences. The author presents the subordination of the prosecution in Poland and other European Union countries. The author indicates that the 2010 reform of the prosecution as well as the disengagement of the Attorney General and Minister of Justice offices has not produced the expected results, since the reform of the prosecution has not been completed. The reform not only failed to strengthened the position of the Attorney General but it has weakened one’s prerogatives. The aforementioned Act of Parliament brought many of the provisions, which on one hand are a contribution to the independence of the prosecutor’s office, and on the other hand, are a tool of control over the prosecution (article 10e and 10f), making the prosecution’s independence illusory. Therefore, according to the author, the new regulations should be given a chance, despite concerns. The aim of the implementation the 2016 Act of Parliament is to provide recovery of strong position by the Attorney General against both the subordinate prosecutors, as well as external bodies.
PL
Zgodnie z Kodeksem Prawa Kanonicznego z 1983 r., „biskupowi diecezjalnemu w powierzonej mu diecezji przysługuje wszelka władza zwyczajna, własna i bezpośrednia, jaka jest wymagana do jego pasterskiego urzędu, z wyłączeniem tych spraw, które na mocy prawa lub dekretu papieża są zarezerwowane najwyższej lub innej władzy kościelnej” (kan. 381 § 1). Ustawodawca stanowi, że „obowiązkiem biskupa diecezjalnego jest rządzić powierzonym mu Kościołem partykularnym; z władzą ustawodawczą, wykonawczą i sądowniczą, zgodnie z przepisami prawa” (kan. 391 § 1). Dlatego też celem artykułu jest analiza władzy biskupiej, jej źródła rodzajów.
EN
According to the 1983 Code of Canon Law, “a diocesan bishop in the diocese entrusted to him has all ordinary, proper, and immediate power which is required for the exercise of his pastoral function except for cases which the law or a decree of the Supreme Pontiff reserves to the supreme authority or to another ecclesiastical authority” (can. 381 § 1). The legislator states that “it is for the diocesan bishop to govern the particular Church entrusted to him with legislative, executive, and judicial power according to the norm of law” (can. 391 § 1). Therefore, the aim of this article is to analyze the episcopal authority, its sources of types.
EN
The article is devoted to the analysis and the characteristics of the rights and the proxies of the monarch in Romania according to the Constitution of 1866. The adoption of the first Basic Law was the fateful act in the history of the state-building processes of Romania and contributed to its development as the sovereign state. The Constitution had the contractual nature and established the compromise between the young bourgeoisie and the large landowners in the form of the constitutional monarchy. The king in Romania for a long time remained the person who was «above» of all the state and political leadership of the country. This status and the proxies of the monarch were delegated with the first Basic Law. The legal fixing of such legal status of the monarch at the level of the Constitution made it possible to establish full-fledged royal power, which was an extremely important state-political step for the development of Romania as the independent country. The constitutional foundations, the functions and the limitations of the institution of the monarchical power in the principality were fixed in the number of the articles of the Constitution of 1866. At the same time, the important state-constitutional aspect was the clear fixation that all proxies of the monarch could be done based on the interests of the Romanian nation. The Basic Law of 1866 established the proxies of the monarch such as in the legislative branch of power (the right of legislative initiative, the right of the interpretation of laws, Articles 32–34); executive power (had to implement it in the manner determined with the Constitution, Article 35) and partially in the justice system (the right to declare amnesty on the political issues, the right to postpone or to mitigate punishment in criminal cases, Article 93). For strengthening of the foundations of the statehood, the Constitution officially established the principle of the hereditary power of the monarch (Article 82). His person was declared inviolable. Herewith, the Romanian constitutionalists fixed that the monarch did not have any other proxies, except those granted to him with the Basic Law (Article 96). Adopted in 1866, the Basic Law approved legally the democratic aspirations of the Romanian nation. It defined directly the most important principles of the state functioning as the principle of the national sovereignty, the principle of the division of powers, the principle of representative government, the principle of hereditary monarchy, the principle of the responsibility of the state officials, the principle of the Rule of law, etc. The Basic Law definitely contributed to the gradual democratization of the state-governing and public structures, the formation of the concept of the civil personality and untouchability, foresaw the presence of the political and legal pluralism in the country, etc. Due to the introduction of the institution of the constitutional monarchy, that ruler in the person of Karl I could establish and hold the certain political balance in the country between the liberals and the conservatives, which opened the possibility to potentially strengthen the two-party system and laid the foundations of the civil society and the future constitutional life of Romania.
19
59%
PL
W przedstawionym opracowaniu przedmiotem zainteresowania Autora stała się wykładnia kan. 136 KPK. Z przeprowadzonych analiz wynika, iż w porządku prawnym Kościoła pierwotną relacją pomiędzy sprawującym władzę a wiernym jest relacja personalna. Ta pryncypialna współzależność wynika z przesłanek teologicznych wiążących się z przyjęciem zarówno sakramentu chrztu, jak i sakramentu święceń. W myśl rozwiązań systemowych, zarówno władzę terytorialną, jak i władzę personalną autorytety kościelne mogą sprawować względem swoich poddanych, gdziekolwiek się oni znajdują. Ponadto Autor wykazał, iż w kan. 136 KPK ustawodawca zawarł jeszcze jedną hipotezę dotyczącą możliwości sprawowania władzy względem podróżnych. W tym przypadku przewagę nad więzią personalną uzyskuje zasada terytorialna, uwydatniona poprzez decyzję ustawodawcy.
EN
The main issue of the presented study was the range of exercising executive power. The author focused his attention on the interpretation of can. 136 CIC. The analysis carried out shows that in the Church legal order the primary relation between an authority and the faithful is personal. This fundamental correlation results from theological premises connected with the sacrament of christening and holy orders. This unusual bond is re;ected in the analyzed disposition (can. 136 CIC), but also in non – code dispositions exercising personal power. System solutions make it clear that territorial as well as personal power can be exercised over the authority’s subjects irrespective of where exactly they are. Moreover, the author proved that can. 136 CIC includes one more hypothesis concerning the possibility of exercising power over travellers. In this case, the territorial principle, emphasized by the legislator, becomes dominant because of the personal bond. It seems that the reasons for this approach are pragmatic since the legislator intended to make exercising.
EN
The article poses a question about the existence of the rule of separation of powers in the EU intuitional system, as it is suggested by the wording of the treaties. The analysis led to the conclusion, that in the EU institutional system there are three separated functions (powers) assigned to different institutions. The Council and the European Parliament are legislative powers, the Commission and the European Council create a “divided executive”. The Court of Justice is a judicial power. The above mentioned institutions gained strong position within their main functions (legislative, executive, judicial), but the proper mechanisms of checks and balances have not been developed, especially in the relations between legislative and executive power. These powers do not limit one another in the EU system. In the EU there are therefore three separated but arbitrary powers – because they do not limit and balance one another, and are not fully controlled by the member states.
PL
W artykule postawione zostały pytania: czy i na ile ukształtowany w systemie instytucjonalnym Unii Europejskiej podział kompetencji między instytucje oraz relacje między nimi odpowiadają modelowi trójpodziału władzy, jakby można było wnioskować z treści traktatów? czy mamy do czynienia z zasadą podziału władzy i jakie rozwiązania normatywne ją wypełniają? czy może ona stanowić zabezpieczenie przed arbitralnością autonomicznych w swych działaniach i nie w pełni kontrolowanych instytucji unijnych? Dokonana analiza pozwala stwierdzić, że w unijnym systemie instytucjonalnym trzy oddzielone funkcje (władze) zostały przyporządkowane odrębnym instytucjom. Rada i Parlament to władza prawodawcza. Komisja i Rada Europejska tworzą divided executive – Komisja w bieżącym procesie politycznym, Rada Europejska jako instytucja spełniająca strategiczne zadania. Trybunał Sprawiedliwości UE dzierży władzą sądowniczą. Instytucje te uzyskały bardzo silną pozycję w ramach swoich funkcji, jednak nie zostały wypracowane odpowiednie mechanizmy hamowania i równoważenia się władz – przede wszystkim prawodawczej i wykonawczej. W systemie unijnym władze te praktycznie się nie ograniczają. Dostępne w tym zakresie mechanizmy hamowania i równoważenia są albo nieliczne, albo politycznie nieskuteczne. W systemie instytucjonalnym Unii Europejskiej mamy więc do czynienia z silną władzą wykonawczą (tylko częściowo, w ograniczony lub mało użyteczny sposób kontrolowaną) i silną władzą prawodawczą niekontrolowaną i nierównoważoną przez władzę wykonawczą, oraz bardzo wpływową, aktywną legislacyjnie władzą sądowniczą. W systemie instytucjonalnym UE funkcjonują zatem trzy oddzielone, ale arbitralne, bo niekontrolowane i nierównoważące się władze.
first rewind previous Strona / 2 next fast forward last
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.