BTI 2008 | Poland Country Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Polish Constitutional Tribunal Judgments with “Deferral Clause” and Their Application by Polish Courts
Contents lists available at Vilnius University Press Teisė ISSN 1392-1274 eISSN 2424-6050 2020, vol. 115, pp. 122–133 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15388/Teise.2019.115.8 Teisės aktualijos / Problems of Law Polish Constitutional Tribunal Judgments with “Deferral Clause” and Their Application by Polish Courts Angelika Ciżyńska-Pałosz ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4947-5771 Jagiellonian University, Faculty of Law and Administration PhD Candidate, Department of Constitutional Law Bracka 12, 31-005 Krakow, Poland Tel. (+48) 12 663 19 78 Email: <[email protected]> The main aim of this paper1 is to present the specificity of functioning of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal, the charac- teristics of one type of its judgments, i.e. verdicts with a “deferral clause” and preparation of the de lege lata and de lege ferenda postulates. Problems analyzed in this work remain valid in both jurisprudence and legal doctrine. Keywords: Polish Constitutional Tribunal, judgments of the Constitutional Tribunal, execution of judgments of the Constitutional Tribunal, constitutional law, judiciary. Lenkijos Konstitucinio teismo nutarimai su atidėjimo nuostata ir jų taikymas Lenkijos teismuose Pagrindinis šio straipsnio tikslas yra Lenkijos Konstitucinio teismo ypatumų bei vienos šios institucijos nutarimų rūšies, t. y. nutarimų su atidėjimo nuostata, būdingų savybių pristatymas ir de lege lata bei de lege ferenda postulatų rengimas. Šiame straipsnyje analizuojami klausimai yra aktualūs tiek teismų praktikai, tiek teisės doktrinai. Pagrindiniai žodžiai: Lenkijos Konstitucinis teismas, Konstitucinio teismo nutarimai, Konstitucinio teismo nutarimų vykdymas, konstitucinė teisė, teismo institucijos. Introduction The Constitutional Tribunal in Poland (thereinafter “the CT”), alongside the State Tribunal and courts, is a part of judicial authority. -
Być Premierem
Być premierem Materiał składa się z sekcji: "Premierzy III RP", "Tadeusz Mazowiecki", "Premierzy II Rzeczpospolitej". Materiał zawiera: - 19 ilustracji (fotografii, obrazów, rysunków), 3 ćwiczenia; - wirtualny spacer po kancelarii Prezesa Rady Ministrów wraz z opisem jej historii; - opis informacji i opinii o Tadeuszu Mazowieckim wraz ćwiczeniem do wykonania na ich podstawie; - zdjęcie, na którym przedstawiono premiera Tadeusza Mazowieckiego w 1989 r.; - galerię zdjęć premierów III RP (Tadeusz Mazowiecki, Jan Krzysztof Bielecki, Jan Olszewski, Waldemar Pawlak, Hanna Suchocka, Józef Oleksy, Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz, Jerzy Buzek, Leszek Miller, Marek Belka, Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz, Jarosław Kaczyński, Donald Tusk, Ewa Kopacz, Beata Szydło); - opis działalności politycznej premierów II RP (Wincenty Witos, Walery Sławek, Felicjan Sławoj Składkowski); - zdjęcie, na którym przedstawiono Wincentego Witosa przemawiającego do tłumu; - zdjęcie, na którym przedstawiono Walerego Sławka; - zdjęcie, na którym przedstawiono Felicjana Sławoj Składkowskiego przemawiającego do urzędników Prezydium Rady Ministrów; - ćwiczenie, które polega na poszukaniu i przedstawieniu różnych ciekawostek o życiu znanych polityków z okresu II i III Rzeczypospolitej; - propozycje pytań do dyskusji na tematy polityczne; - ćwiczenie, które polega na opracowaniu galerii premierów II RP. Być premierem Kancelaria Prezesa Rady Ministrów Laleczki, licencja: CC BY-SA 4.0 Zobacz, jak wygląda kancelaria Prezesa Rady Ministrów, miejsce pracy premiera. Źródło: PANORAMIX, licencja: CC BY 3.0. Premierzy III RP Sprawowanie urzędu premiera to wielki zaszczyt, ale i ogromna odpowiedzialność. Prezes Rady Ministrów jest zgodnie z Konstytucją RP dopiero czwartą osobą w państwie (po prezydencie, marszałakch Sejmu i Senatu), ale w praktyce skupia w swoich rękach niemal całą władzę wykonawczą. Od decyzji, które podejmuje szef rządu, zależy jakość życia wielu milionów ludzi. Znane są dzieje narodów, które pod mądrym przewodnictwem rozkwitały, a pod złym popadały w biedę i chaos. -
Eurozone Enlargement in Times of Crisis: Challenges for the V4 Countries
EUROZONE ENLARGEMENT IN TIMES OF CRISIS: CHALLENGES FOR THE V4 COUNTRIES Edited by Agata Gostyńska, Paweł Tokarski, Patryk Toporowski, Damian Wnukowski Warsaw 2014 © Polski Instytut Spraw Międzynarodowych, 2014 Editor Brien Barnett Technical editor and cover designer Dorota Dołęgowska The RASTANEWS project is funded by the European Commission under the Seventh Framework Programme (SSH.2012.1.3-1) The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme [FP7/2007-2013] under the grant agreement no. 320278 Scientific research financed from funds for science in 2013–2016 for an international co-financed project ISBN 978-83-62453-69-6 (pb) ISBN 978-83-62453-80-1 (epub) ISBN 978-83-62453-81-8 (mobi) ISBN 978-83-62453-82-5 (pdf) Polski Instytut Spraw Międzynarodowych ul. Warecka 1a, 00-950 Warszawa phone (+48) 22 556 80 00, fax (+48) 22 556 80 99 [email protected], www.pism.pl Printed by: RYKO, ul. Piłsudskiego 17, 05-480 Karczew CONTENTS Introduction . 5 Part I: Eurozone Crisis: Selected Issues Ognian Hishow Overcoming the Intra-European Imbalance: How Much Would Germany Have to Adjust? . 11 Anna Visvizi Greece: Eurozone’s Weak Link . 19 Zoltán Gál Role of Financial Sector FDI in Regional Imbalances in Central and Eastern Europe. 27 Part II: Eurozone Enlargement: Economic and Political Challenges for V4 Countries Ettore Dorrucci Enlarging the Euro Area: Four Lessons for CEE Countries . .39 Patryk Toporowski The Impact of Monetary Integration on Trade within the Euro Area: The Evidence, Revisited . .49 Julius Horvath Political Economy of Accession to the Euro: The Case of Hungary . -
Poland Report
Sustainable Governance SGI Indicators 2009 Poland report SGI 2009 | 2 Poland report Executive summary The parliamentary elections in September 2005 changed the political landscape of Poland once again. Fed up with the scandals and corruption of the post- communist Democratic Left Alliance (SLD), voters made the conservative party Freedom and Justice (PiS) with its leading figures, Lech Kaczyński and Jarosław Kaczyński, the biggest party in government. The PiS initially formed a minority government backed by the rightist League of Polish Families (LPR) and the populist agrarian party Samoobrona. In May 2006, the three parties formed a coalition government, which broke apart after fierce internal struggles in August 2007. The break-up of the coalition led to early elections, the result of which in October 2007 was the PiS being voted out of office. The PiS government had an ambitious program with a strong anti-communist and anti-liberal tenor. Emphasizing the need for a clear break with the past and a determination to fight against communist and post-communist networks, it called for the founding of a “fourth republic” characterized by a strong state, a more resolute fight for Poland’s national interests and a ”unified Poland.” The rhetoric, politics and policies of the PiS government contributed to the strong political polarization inside the country and to Poland’s isolation within the European Union. In its attempt to break with the past, the PiS government infringed upon civil rights and the separation of government powers. It increased government control over the public media, intervened in the judiciary, launched a radical lustration law (partly scrapped by the Constitutional Court in May 2007), dissolved the Agency for Gender Equality and manipulated the fight against corruption for political means. -
Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej
CENTRUM BADANIA OPINII SPOŁECZNEJ SEKRETARIAT 629 - 35 - 69, 628 - 37 - 04 UL. ŻURAWIA 4A, SKR. PT.24 OŚRODEK INFORMACJI 693 - 46 - 92, 625 - 76 - 23 00 - 503 W A R S Z A W A TELEFAX 629 - 40 - 89 INTERNET http://www.cbos.pl E-mail: [email protected] BS/48/2009 ZAUFANIE DO POLITYKÓW W MARCU KOMUNIKAT Z BADAŃ WARSZAWA, MARZEC 2009 PRZEDRUK I ROZPOWSZECHNIANIE MATERIAŁÓW CBOS W CAŁOŚCI LUB W CZĘŚCI ORAZ WYKORZYSTANIE DANYCH EMPIRYCZNYCH JEST DOZWOLONE WYŁĄCZNIE Z PODANIEM ŹRÓDŁA W marcu1 politykiem cieszącym się wśród Polaków największym zaufaniem jest minister spraw zagranicznych Radosław Sikorski (61%), który minimalnie wyprzedza w tym rankingu premiera Donalda Tuska (59%) oraz Lecha Wałęsę (58%). Zaufaniem nieco ponad połowy Polaków cieszy się marszałek Sejmu Bronisław Komorowski (52%), niewiele mniej osób ufa wicepremierowi i ministrowi gospodarki Waldemarowi Pawlakowi (50%). Na zbliżonym poziomie kształtuje się też zaufanie do Włodzimierza Cimoszewicza (48%), którego nazwisko ponownie umieściliśmy na naszej liście w związku ze zgłoszeniem jego kandydatury na stanowisko sekretarza generalnego Rady Europy. Kolejne miejsca w rankingu zaufania do polityków, jednak już z wyraźnie słabszym wynikiem, zajmują liderzy ugrupowań lewicowych Marek Borowski (40%) oraz Wojciech Olejniczak (37%). Poza czołówką najpopularniejszych polityków znalazł się w tym miesiącu Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz, do którego zaufanie deklaruje obecnie co trzeci ankietowany (33%). Niemal tyle samo sympatyków mają prezydent Lech Kaczyński (32% deklaracji zaufania), minister zdrowia Ewa Kopacz (32%) oraz szef MON Bogdan Klich (31%). Zaufaniem niespełna jednej trzeciej badanych cieszą się: przewodniczący klubu parlamentarnego PO Zbigniew Chlebowski (29%), Janusz Palikot (29%), a także wicepremier i szef MSWiA Grzegorz Schetyna (28%). Co czwarty respondent deklaruje zaufanie do marszałka Senatu Bogdana Borusewicza (26%) oraz do lidera głównej partii opozycyjnej Jarosława Kaczyńskiego (25%). -
The Dispute Over the Constitutional Tribunal in Poland and Its Impact on the Protection of Constitutional Rights and Freedoms1
International Comparative Jurisprudence 2017 Volume 3 Issue 2 ISSN 2351-6674 (online) DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.13165/j.icj.2017.12.003 THE DISPUTE OVER THE CONSTITUTIONAL TRIBUNAL IN POLAND AND ITS IMPACT ON THE PROTECTION OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS1 Anna Rytel-Warzocha University of Gdańsk, Poland E-mail: [email protected] Received 30 December 2016; accepted 8 July 2017 Abstract. The article is devoted to the conflict over the Constitutional Tribunal in Poland that started in late 2015 and turned into a constitutional crisis in 2016. The article presents the causes and main aspects of the conflict, focusing on the government’s refusal to publish the verdict of the Constitutional Tribunal and the consequences thereof for the effectiveness of the protection of constitutional rights. Keywords: Constitutional Tribunal, constitutional complaint, judicial review, constitutional crises, human rights Introduction It is the standard in a democratic state ruled by law that the fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens and humans in general are set forth in the constitution as the supreme legislative act in the state. However, it is not the catalogue itself that is particularly important, but rather – the mechanisms that secure these rights and freedoms and allow for their effective implementation. One such institution in the Polish constitutional system is the Constitutional Tribunal, which possesses the competence to review constitutional complaints as well as to conduct abstract constitutional review of legal provisions concerning the rights and freedoms of citizens. The Constitutional Tribunal was first established within the constitutional system of Poland in 1982 by an amendment to the Constitution of the Polish People’s Republic of 1952. -
Konrad Raczkowski Public Management Theory and Practice 4
Konrad Raczkowski Public Management Theory and Practice 4^1 Springer O.ST f" 'S 1 State as a Special Organisation of Society 1 1.1 Notion and Origins of the State 1 1.2 State According to Social Teachings of the Church 4 1.3 Tasks for State as the System of Institutions 6 1.4 Governance Versus Public Management 9 References 16 2 Flanning and Decision Making in Public Management 21 2.1 The Essence of Flanning 21 2.2 Decisions and Their Classification 27 2.3 Decision Making in Conditions of Certainty, Risk and Uncertainty 33 2.4 Heterogeneous Knowledge in Strategie Flanning and Decision Making 36 2.5 Flanning and Decision Making in Political Transformation 38 2.6 Institutional Development Flanning on Local Government Level (IDF Method) 45 References 49 3 State Organisation for Institutional and Systemic Perspective 55 3.1 Dynamic Equilibrium of Organised Things 55 3.2 New Institutional Economy and State Organisation 58 3.3 Virtual Social Structure in Actual State Organisation 62 3.4 Organisational Social System of the State 64 3.5 Role of Non-governmental Organisations in the State 68 3.6 Main Models of State Organisation 73 3.7 Models of Organisation of Unitary States 80 3.8 Organisation of Multilevel Management in European Union 87 References 93 4 Managing and Leading in Public Organisations 99 4.1 Managing the Intellectual Capital in Public Organisation 99 4.2 Leadership in Network-Dominated Public Sphere 104 xiii xiv Contents 4.3 Global Crisis of Public Leadership 111 4.4 Information and Disinformation: Key Tools of State Management -
Poland by Mikołaj Czes´Nik
Poland by Mikołaj Czes´nik Capital: Warsaw Population: 38.5 million GNI/capita, PPP: US$21,760 Source: The data above are drawn from the World Bank’sWorld Development Indicators 2014. Nations in Transit Ratings and Averaged Scores 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Electoral Process 1.75 1.75 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.75 1.50 1.25 1.25 1.25 Civil Society 1.25 1.25 1.50 1.25 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 Independent Media 1.50 1.75 2.25 2.25 2.00 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.50 2.50 National Democratic Governance 2.50 2.75 3.25 3.50 3.25 3.25 2.75 2.50 2.50 2.50 Local Democratic Governance 2.00 2.00 2.25 2.25 2.00 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.50 Judicial Framework and Independence 2.00 2.25 2.25 2.50 2.25 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 Corruption 3.00 3.25 3.00 3.00 2.75 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.50 Democracy Score 2.00 2.14 2.36 2.39 2.25 2.32 2.21 2.14 2.18 2.18 NOTE: The ratings reflect the consensus of Freedom House, its academic advisers, and the author(s) of this report. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the author(s). The ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest. -
Dissolution of the Parliament According to the Constitution of the Republic of Poland
Katarzyna Dunaj University of Humanities and Sciences in Siedlce, Poland DISSOLUTION OF THE PARLIAMENT ACCORDING TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF POLAND Abstract Dissolution of the parliament is a characteristic feature of parliamentary system of government. The Constitution of the Republic of Poland has adopted a rationalized parliamentary system of government, inter alia the constructive vote of no confidence, modeled on the German Basic Law. For this reason the president can dissolve the House of Representatives ( Sejm ) only in two situations: in the event that a vote of confidence has not been granted to the Council of Ministers pursuant to Article 155 Paragraph 1 or if, after 4 months from the day of submission of a draft Budget to the Sejm, it has not been adopted or presented to the president for signature (Article 225). Furthermore the Sejm may shorten its term of office by a resolution passed by a majority of at least two-thirds of the votes of the statutory number of Deputies (Article 98, Paragraph 3). Key words: dissolution of the parliament, Constitution of the Republic of Poland, president . Dissolution of parliament is an inherent feature of the parliamentary system of government. In the event of a cabinet crisis (a vote of no-confidence passed by the parliament towards the government) a normal means of its removal is dissolution of the parliament and selecting by means of elections a new government majority. Therefore, this institution is common in the constitutions of European states i. However, it is not known by the United States Constitution of 1787, which adopted a presidential system of government, characterized by, among others the lack of the equivalent of the Council of Ministers. -
Chairperson's Statement United Nations Conference on Anti-Corruption Measures, Good Governance & Human Rights
Chairperson’s Statement United Nations Conference on Anti-Corruption Measures, Good Governance & Human Rights Warsaw, Republic of Poland, 8-9 November 2006 Introduction The United Nations Conference on Anti-Corruption Measures, Good Governance and Human Rights was convened in Warsaw, Republic of Poland, from 8-9 November 2006. It was organized by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in cooperation with the Government of the Republic of Poland. The Conference had a practical orientation and was structured in a manner that could lead to the discussion of practical and concrete recommendations. There were more than 240 participants from more than 100 countries, including anti-corruption and human rights experts, governments’ representatives, public officials, civil society and private sector actors involved in leading national anti- corruption efforts. The Chairman of the Conference was H.E. Anna Fotyga, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Poland. The Conference was organized in response to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights Resolution 2005/68, which requested the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights “[...] to convene a seminar in 2006 [...] on the role of anti- corruption measures at the national and international levels in good governance practices for the promotion and protection of human rights.” The Conference was a follow-up to the joint OHCHR-UNDP Seminar on good governance practices for the promotion and protection of human rights, which took place in Seoul in September 2004. The conclusions of that Seminar emphasized the mutually reinforcing, and sometimes overlapping, relationship between good governance and human rights. -
Poland 2005 Hit Summary
European Health Systems in Transition Observatory on Health Systems and Policies HiT Summary Poland Fig. Average life expectancy at birth in Poland compared with selected countries and regional averages, 970–2003 80 75 70 65 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 Czech Republic Germany Hungary Lithuania Poland EU average EU average for Member States joining 1 May 2004 Source: European Health for All database, June 2005. Note: EU: European Union. Overview development of a positive attitude in the society towards the health system and health reforms. After the introduction of health reforms initiated in 1989, the new Law on Health Care Services Health expenditure and GDP Financed from Public Sources (2004) further In 2002, total expenditure on health in Poland as a reformed the current law in areas defining: the percentage of GDP reached 6.1%: 2.6 percentage responsibilities of the Ministry of Health, the points lower than the average of 8.7% for governance of the National Health Fund and countries belonging to the EU prior to May 2004, health planning. While significant achievements, European Observatory such as greater longevity, shorter hospitalization on Health Systems and Policies stays, improved primary health care, and a WHO Regional Office for Europe greater focus on health prevention and promotion, Scherfigsvej 8 DK-200 Copenhagen have been accomplished, numerous challenges, Denmark such as unfavourable demographic trends, an Telephone: +45 39 7 7 7 Fax: +45 39 7 8 8 underfunding of the public health system and E-mail: [email protected] limited access to care, continue to hinder the www.euro.who.int/observatory HiT summary: Poland, 2005 and 0.5 percentage points below the average of in negative natural population growth as in new EU Member States. -
Poland by Piotr Arak, Piotr Żakowiecki
Poland by Piotr Arak, Piotr Żakowiecki Capital: Warsaw Population: 38 million GNI/capita, PPP: $23,930 Source: World Bank World Development Indicators. Nations in Transit Ratings and Averaged Scores 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 National Democratic 3.25 3.50 3.25 3.25 2.75 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.75 Governance Electoral Process 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.75 1.50 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.50 1.50 Civil Society 1.50 1.25 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 Independent Media 2.25 2.25 2.00 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.75 Local Democratic 2.25 2.25 2.00 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.75 1.50 1.50 1.50 Governance Judicial Framework 2.25 2.50 2.25 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.75 and Independence Corruption 3.00 3.00 2.75 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.25 3.50 3.50 3.50 Democracy Score 2.36 2.39 2.25 2.32 2.21 2.14 2.18 2.18 2.21 2.32 NOTE: The ratings reflect the consensus of Freedom House, its academic advisers, and the author(s) of this report. If consensus cannot be reached, Freedom House is responsible for the final ratings. The ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing the highest level of democratic progress and 7 the lowest.