This article is an attempt to present the regime of the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria as an alternative to the entire state. It explores the ideology of Abdullah Öcalan, which is the foundation of this regime. It also analyses the systemic assumptions characteristic of the democratic autonomy in Rojava, and then in the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria. The thesis of the article is that the proposal for a new regime is a huge challenge for the people of these parts of Syria, President Bashar al-Assad and the international environment, in particular Turkey. The success of this project is difficult to assess as it depends on too many variables of an internal and international nature.
{"title":"Demokratyczny konfederalizm jako alternatywny ustrój dla Autonomicznej Administracji Północnej i Wschodniej Syrii","authors":"Anita Adamczyk, Fuad Jomma","doi":"10.31268/ps.2022.110","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31268/ps.2022.110","url":null,"abstract":"This article is an attempt to present the regime of the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria as an alternative to the entire state. It explores the ideology of Abdullah Öcalan, which is the foundation of this regime. It also analyses the systemic assumptions characteristic of the democratic autonomy in Rojava, and then in the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria. The thesis of the article is that the proposal for a new regime is a huge challenge for the people of these parts of Syria, President Bashar al-Assad and the international environment, in particular Turkey. The success of this project is difficult to assess as it depends on too many variables of an internal and international nature.","PeriodicalId":42093,"journal":{"name":"Przeglad Sejmowy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69346673","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The development of artificial intelligence raises many ethical and legal challenges. The discussion concerns mainly the issues of competition and consumer protection law, personal data protection law, civil liability, contract law, however the key issue, so far neglected in the literature, may be the problem of systemic nature connected with the question of the necessity to regulate AI at the constitutional level. Such a need arises from the recognition of the role that AI will soon play in the state and society. Safeguarding human rights will require the introduction of a fundamental norm that expresses the idea of the superior position of humans over machines (autonomous systems). However, such a seemingly obvious norm, understood literally, is not at all certain when superhuman efficiency (also intellectual) of machines is taken into account. As a consequence, such a norm – derived from human dignity – may stand in unresolvable opposition to the needs of the technological system. The search for a new constitutional model that responds to these challenges should begin today.
{"title":"My, Naród? Konstytucjonalizacja sztucznej inteligencji, czyli o potrzebie przemodelowania założeń ustrojowych","authors":"Paweł Księżak","doi":"10.31268/ps.2021.46","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31268/ps.2021.46","url":null,"abstract":"The development of artificial intelligence raises many ethical and legal challenges. The discussion concerns mainly the issues of competition and consumer protection law, personal data protection law, civil liability, contract law, however the key issue, so far neglected in the literature, may be the problem of systemic nature connected with the question of the necessity to regulate AI at the constitutional level. Such a need arises from the recognition of the role that AI will soon play in the state and society. Safeguarding human rights will require the introduction of a fundamental norm that expresses the idea of the superior position of humans over machines (autonomous systems). However, such a seemingly obvious norm, understood literally, is not at all certain when superhuman efficiency (also intellectual) of machines is taken into account. As a consequence, such a norm – derived from human dignity – may stand in unresolvable opposition to the needs of the technological system. The search for a new constitutional model that responds to these challenges should begin today.","PeriodicalId":42093,"journal":{"name":"Przeglad Sejmowy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69345464","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The position of the NBP at the time of the common market and progressive Europeanisation of the economy and all areas of community life was particularly important. Currently, in the time of the global crisis caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, encompassing both the supply and demand side of the world economy, the role of the central bank is increasing. Without its involvement, there would be no effective protective measures, aimed at mitigating the decline in GDP growth in Poland and protecting jobs. The central bank, together with the Polish Government and Parliament, is of key importance for Poland’s economic development, while the independence of the NBP is of major significance for its credibility in financial markets. That is why it is so important to try to answer the questions what the independence of the NBP is and whether constitutional and statutory regulations of the relations between the Parliament of the Republic of Poland and the central bank do not breach this independence.
{"title":"Niezależność Narodowego Banku Polskiego a relacje z Parlamentem RP","authors":"R. Sura","doi":"10.31268/ps.2021.48","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31268/ps.2021.48","url":null,"abstract":"The position of the NBP at the time of the common market and progressive Europeanisation of the economy and all areas of community life was particularly important. Currently, in the time of the global crisis caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, encompassing both the supply and demand side of the world economy, the role of the central bank is increasing. Without its involvement, there would be no effective protective measures, aimed at mitigating the decline in GDP growth in Poland and protecting jobs. The central bank, together with the Polish Government and Parliament, is of key importance for Poland’s economic development, while the independence of the NBP is of major significance for its credibility in financial markets. That is why it is so important to try to answer the questions what the independence of the NBP is and whether constitutional and statutory regulations of the relations between the Parliament of the Republic of Poland and the central bank do not breach this independence.","PeriodicalId":42093,"journal":{"name":"Przeglad Sejmowy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69345687","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Polish statutory regulations concerning the liquidation of Foundations are contained in Article 15 of the Act of 6 April 1984 concerning Foundations, hereinafter referred to as the “Act on Foundations”. The provisions of this Article constitute the only legal basis applicable to the entire complicated process of eliminating the legal existence of a Foundation as part of its liquidation. The Act on Foundations does not establish the course of liquidation proceedings, in this respect it refers to the provisions of the Statutes. Generality and imprecisiness of the applicable legal provisions regarding the liquidation of Foundations has been the subject of universal criticism in the legal literature; the current regulation is considered inappropriate and insufficient. De lege lata indicates a clear need to apply legal solutions contained in other legal acts governing the liquidation of other legal entities to the liquidation of Foundations. Although it has been variously postulated that Foundations should be liquidated according to the laws governing the liquidation of cooperatives, Associations, or according to the Code of Commercial Partnerships and Companies, it is generally acknowledged that the application of the law governing cooperatives is most closely related to the liquidation of Foundations. It is worth underscoring that the proceedings for liquidating a legal cooperative are regulated rather thoroughly and appropriately and as a result they are often used.
{"title":"Dopuszczalność stosowania przepisów prawa spółdzielczego do trybu likwidacji fundacji. Rozważania w kontekście poglądów Henryka Ciocha","authors":"Marta Stepnowska","doi":"10.31268/ps.2021.53","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31268/ps.2021.53","url":null,"abstract":"The Polish statutory regulations concerning the liquidation of Foundations are contained in Article 15 of the Act of 6 April 1984 concerning Foundations, hereinafter referred to as the “Act on Foundations”. The provisions of this Article constitute the only legal basis applicable to the entire complicated process of eliminating the legal existence of a Foundation as part of its liquidation. The Act on Foundations does not establish the course of liquidation proceedings, in this respect it refers to the provisions of the Statutes. Generality and imprecisiness of the applicable legal provisions regarding the liquidation of Foundations has been the subject of universal criticism in the legal literature; the current regulation is considered inappropriate and insufficient. De lege lata indicates a clear need to apply legal solutions contained in other legal acts governing the liquidation of other legal entities to the liquidation of Foundations. Although it has been variously postulated that Foundations should be liquidated according to the laws governing the liquidation of cooperatives, Associations, or according to the Code of Commercial Partnerships and Companies, it is generally acknowledged that the application of the law governing cooperatives is most closely related to the liquidation of Foundations. It is worth underscoring that the proceedings for liquidating a legal cooperative are regulated rather thoroughly and appropriately and as a result they are often used.","PeriodicalId":42093,"journal":{"name":"Przeglad Sejmowy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69345891","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The article presents the issue of securing cooperative claims against the background of selected judgments of the Supreme Court. Such claims may be secured by establishing a mortgage, a registered pledge or the transfer of ownership for security. A cooperative, especially a housing cooperative, may be a beneficiary of such securities as a creditor. The assets of a cooperative can also be encumbered. It is not possible to establish security on a real estate with an unclear legal status. Establishing a mortgage on a separate ownership of the premises for which a land and mortgage register cannot be established is excluded. In a case of a title transfer for security, it is crucial to contractually define the mechanism of clearance for the parties and the issue of the so-called oversecuring.
{"title":"Zabezpieczenia rzeczowe dotyczące spółdzielni w orzecznictwie sądowym – wybrane zagadnienia","authors":"Jacek Widło","doi":"10.31268/ps.2021.55","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31268/ps.2021.55","url":null,"abstract":"The article presents the issue of securing cooperative claims against the background of selected judgments of the Supreme Court. Such claims may be secured by establishing a mortgage, a registered pledge or the transfer of ownership for security. A cooperative, especially a housing cooperative, may be a beneficiary of such securities as a creditor. The assets of a cooperative can also be encumbered. It is not possible to establish security on a real estate with an unclear legal status. Establishing a mortgage on a separate ownership of the premises for which a land and mortgage register cannot be established is excluded. In a case of a title transfer for security, it is crucial to contractually define the mechanism of clearance for the parties and the issue of the so-called oversecuring.","PeriodicalId":42093,"journal":{"name":"Przeglad Sejmowy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69345945","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The authors attempt to examine two parallel and often treated as incomplete processes of strengthening the competences of the European Parliament and at the same time defining a place of national parliaments of Member States in the political system of the EU. The parallelism of these phenomena may seem paradoxical, since it can be assumed that despite competency competition between the EP and the national parliaments, strengthening the competences of the former does not preclude maximising the competences of the latter. The system of unification and harmonisation present in the European Union does not have to weaken national parliaments. The more so that the parliaments of the Member States try to neutralise the autonomy of EU institutions, which “appropriate” their current field of play. The analysis was made based on a research sample consisting of methods for strengthening the EP and methods for maximising the parliaments of the Member States.
{"title":"Proces wzmacniania kompetencji Parlamentu Europejskiego a nowa pozycja parlamentów narodowych w systemie politycznym Unii Europejskiej","authors":"Zbigniew Czachór, J. Ruszkowski","doi":"10.31268/ps.2021.58","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31268/ps.2021.58","url":null,"abstract":"The authors attempt to examine two parallel and often treated as incomplete processes of strengthening the competences of the European Parliament and at the same time defining a place of national parliaments of Member States in the political system of the EU. The parallelism of these phenomena may seem paradoxical, since it can be assumed that despite competency competition between the EP and the national parliaments, strengthening the competences of the former does not preclude maximising the competences of the latter. The system of unification and harmonisation present in the European Union does not have to weaken national parliaments. The more so that the parliaments of the Member States try to neutralise the autonomy of EU institutions, which “appropriate” their current field of play. The analysis was made based on a research sample consisting of methods for strengthening the EP and methods for maximising the parliaments of the Member States.","PeriodicalId":42093,"journal":{"name":"Przeglad Sejmowy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69345995","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article aims to present the beginnings and development of the forms of parliamentarism in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania when it was an independently functioning state and after its Union with the Crown of Poland, which gave rise to a new state in Europe called the Commonwealth. Lithuanian parliamentarism developed through a long process of evolution of representative institutions. The most important role was played by a group of magnates (the so-called lords and princes) holding the highest offices in the state and the Church, and appointed by the ruler. This group formed the Council of Lords, an advisory body to the grand dukes; during the Commonwealth ruler’s rare stays in Lithuania, the Council took over many of his prerogatives, becoming the most important legislative, executive, and judicial body of the state, except for the grand duke himself. The strong position of the Council of Lords (and in fact, a few of its most important members holding the most prominent offices) influenced for centuries the political life of Lithuania, dominated by powerful families, almost constantly playing the role of the so-called hegemons, even after they were formally equated in law with the common nobility in 1563. The Lithuanian nobility, on the other hand, was slowly gaining in the sixteenth century the right to participate in the parliamentary life of the state. In principle, however, Lithuanian nobles were deprived of the legislative and control initiative; their role was accepting and executing the ruler’s decisions agreed with the Council of Lords. Thus, they were interested in acquiring the rights of the Polish nobility, and consequently, in the Union with the Polish Crown. The establishment of the Commonwealth resulted in the incorporation of Lithuanian representatives from the senatorial group and poviat (county; Polish: powiat) nobility to the General Sejm of the Crown, in which, however, they could not play a significant role due to their small number compared to their Polish counterparts. In such a situation, it was important for the Lithuanians to maintain the principle of liberum veto, for in this way they could prevent the adoption of constitutions contrary to their interests. Throughout the whole history of the Commonwealth, the Lithuanians made efforts to ensure that their representation corresponded to the popular definition of the state of both nations (Polish and Lithuanian), and not one of its three equal provinces (Greater Poland, Little Poland, Lithuania). However, in the parliamentary system, their only success was the periodic separation of the constitutions for the Grand Duchy of Lithuania from those of the whole state. Even so, Lithuania was treated as one of three provinces, which was reflected in the election of a Lithuanian deputy as Sejm marshal every third Sejm, in the composition of Sejm commissions (1/3 of seats for Lithuanians), and finally in holding of every third Sejm in Lithuania (since 1676). While preparing the Li
本文旨在介绍立陶宛大公国议会制形式的起源和发展，当时立陶宛大公国是一个独立运作的国家，之后与波兰王国结盟，在欧洲产生了一个新的国家，称为英联邦。立陶宛议会制是通过代议制机构的长期演变过程发展起来的。最重要的角色是由一群巨头(所谓的领主和王子)扮演的，他们在国家和教会中担任最高职位，由统治者任命。这些人组成了上议院，这是大公们的咨询机构;在这位联邦统治者罕见地停留在立陶宛期间，议会接管了他的许多特权，成为除了大公本人之外最重要的立法、行政和司法机构。上议院的强势地位(事实上，其中一些最重要的成员担任着最重要的职位)影响了几个世纪以来立陶宛的政治生活，由强大的家族主导，几乎一直扮演着所谓的霸主的角色，即使在1563年他们在法律上正式等同于普通贵族。另一方面，立陶宛贵族在16世纪慢慢获得了参与国家议会生活的权利。然而，立陶宛贵族在原则上被剥夺了立法和控制的主动权;他们的职责是接受并执行与上议院一致的统治者的决定。因此，他们有兴趣获得波兰贵族的权利，并因此与波兰王室结盟。联邦的建立导致了来自参议院集团和波维亚特(县)的立陶宛代表的合并;波兰:贵族(powiat)到皇家瑟姆(General Sejm)，然而，由于与波兰同行相比，他们的人数较少，因此无法发挥重要作用。在这种情况下，立陶宛人保持自由否决的原则是重要的，因为这样他们就可以防止通过违背他们利益的宪法。在整个联邦历史中，立陶宛人努力确保他们的代表权符合两个国家(波兰和立陶宛)的流行定义，而不是三个平等省份之一(大波兰，小波兰，立陶宛)。然而，在议会制中，他们唯一的成功是立陶宛大公国的宪法与整个国家的宪法的定期分离。即便如此，立陶宛仍被视为三个省之一，这反映在每三届瑟姆选举一名立陶宛代表为瑟姆主席，在瑟姆委员会的组成中(立陶宛人占三分之一的席位)，最后在立陶宛举行每三届瑟姆(自1676年以来)。1564年至1566年，齐格蒙特二世奥古斯都(Zygmunt II Augustus)国王在准备立陶宛与波兰联合的同时，进行了实质性的政治和法律改革。他引入了新的行政区划、统一的议会制度(地区议会、两院制瑟姆)和新的民事、刑事和行政法法典(1566年所谓的《第二立陶宛法规》)。这个体系比波兰王室现行的体系更清晰、更简单、更周到。一个省的每个省(voivodeship，有些是单一省)都要在一个特定的地方(实际上是这个省的首都)开会讨论，聚集当地的参议员和土地所有者(拉丁语:财主)，并在一个特定行政单位的“领主”的指导下进行讨论，即主教或voivode in poviats，从1764年开始，在非voivodeship poviats，当然是地方元帅。法律规定了谁应该参加某一特定的议会，否则将受到处罚，议会可以开会多长时间，可以选出多少名代表(普通议会每个选区只能选出两名代表)，他们每个人的工作报酬是多少。在议会辩论期间，立陶宛的参议员和众议员经常在所谓的省会议上分别辩论(类似于大波兰和小波兰的贵族)，为自己的省准备宪法，并可能在国家问题上采取共同立场。由于在立陶宛法律中，只有一般的议会存在，很长一段时间立陶宛人不承认召集和加冕的议会，并不总是参与其中，也不同意将它们列入候补会议(即由立陶宛元帅担任首脑)。直到18世纪早期，还存在统治者或大公国公民自己召集所谓立陶宛议会的情况，即。 本文旨在介绍立陶宛大公国议会制形式的起源和发展，当时立陶宛大公国是一个独立运作的国家，之后与波兰王国结盟，在欧洲产生了一个新的国家，称为英联邦。立陶宛议会制是通过代议制机构的长期演变过程发展起来的。最重要的角色是由一群巨头(所谓的领主和王子)扮演的，他们在国家和教会中担任最高职位，由统治者任命。这些人组成了上议院，这是大公们的咨询机构;在这位联邦统治者罕见地停留在立陶宛期间，议会接管了他的许多特权，成为除了大公本人之外最重要的立法、行政和司法机构。上议院的强势地位(事实上，其中一些最重要的成员担任着最重要的职位)影响了几个世纪以来立陶宛的政治生活，由强大的家族主导，几乎一直扮演着所谓的霸主的角色，即使在1563年他们在法律上正式等同于普通贵族。另一方面，立陶宛贵族在16世纪慢慢获得了参与国家议会生活的权利。然而，立陶宛贵族在原则上被剥夺了立法和控制的主动权;他们的职责是接受并执行与上议院一致的统治者的决定。因此，他们有兴趣获得波兰贵族的权利，并因此与波兰王室结盟。联邦的建立导致了来自参议院集团和波维亚特(县)的立陶宛代表的合并;波兰:贵族(powiat)到皇家瑟姆(General Sejm)，然而，由于与波兰同行相比，他们的人数较少，因此无法发挥重要作用。在这种情况下，立陶宛人保持自由否决的原则是重要的，因为这样他们就可以防止通过违背他们利益的宪法。在整个联邦历史中，立陶宛人努力确保他们的代表权符合两个国家(波兰和立陶宛)的流行定义，而不是三个平等省份之一(大波兰，小波兰，立陶宛)。然而，在议会制中，他们唯一的成功是立陶宛大公国的宪法与整个国家的宪法的定期分离。即便如此，立陶宛仍被视为三个省之一，这反映在每三届瑟姆选举一名立陶宛代表为瑟姆主席，在瑟姆委员会的组成中(立陶宛人占三分之一的席位)，最后在立陶宛举行每三届瑟姆(自1676年以来)。1564年至1566年，齐格蒙特二世奥古斯都(Zygmunt II Augustus)国王在准备立陶宛与波兰联合的同时，进行了实质性的政治和法律改革。他引入了新的行政区划、统一的议会制度(地区议会、两院制瑟姆)和新的民事、刑事和行政法法典(1566年所谓的《第二立陶宛法规》)。这个体系比波兰王室现行的体系更清晰、更简单、更周到。一个省的每个省(voivodeship，有些是单一省)都要在一个特定的地方(实际上是这个省的首都)开会讨论，聚集当地的参议员和土地所有者(拉丁语:财主)，并在一个特定行政单位的“领主”的指导下进行讨论，即主教或voivode in poviats，从1764年开始，在非voivodeship poviats，当然是地方元帅。法律规定了谁应该参加某一特定的议会，否则将受到处罚，议会可以开会多长时间，可以选出多少名代表(普通议会每个选区只能选出两名代表)，他们每个人的工作报酬是多少。在议会辩论期间，立陶宛的参议员和众议员经常在所谓的省会议上分别辩论(类似于大波兰和小波兰的贵族)，为自己的省准备宪法，并可能在国家问题上采取共同立场。由于在立陶宛法律中，只有一般的议会存在，很长一段时间立陶宛人不承认召集和加冕的议会，并不总是参与其中，也不同意将它们列入候补会议(即由立陶宛元帅担任首脑)。直到18世纪早期，还存在统治者或大公国公民自己召集所谓立陶宛议会的情况，即。 立陶宛各阶层的准瑟姆(sejm)会议，审议并作出综合性质的决定(主要是税收)。这一进程是由斯特凡·巴托里发起的，但立陶宛人不欢迎这些会议，因为这违反了联盟的规定。所谓的议会大会(先是在沃卡维斯克[Wołkowysk]，然后在斯洛尼姆举行)，在会议上就整个国家和立陶宛本身的重要事项达成一致立场，但很快就结束了。立陶宛的权贵们对这样的集会不感兴趣，贵族们(尽管偶尔会尝试恢复这一制度)没有力量或意愿为其运作而努力。共同立场协调员的职能随后由上述各省会议接管。总之，应该指出的
{"title":"Parlamentaryzm Wielkiego Księstwa Litewskiego XIV–XVIII w.","authors":"A. Rachuba","doi":"10.31268/ps.2021.74","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31268/ps.2021.74","url":null,"abstract":"This article aims to present the beginnings and development of the forms of parliamentarism in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania when it was an independently functioning state and after its Union with the Crown of Poland, which gave rise to a new state in Europe called the Commonwealth. Lithuanian parliamentarism developed through a long process of evolution of representative institutions. The most important role was played by a group of magnates (the so-called lords and princes) holding the highest offices in the state and the Church, and appointed by the ruler. This group formed the Council of Lords, an advisory body to the grand dukes; during the Commonwealth ruler’s rare stays in Lithuania, the Council took over many of his prerogatives, becoming the most important legislative, executive, and judicial body of the state, except for the grand duke himself. The strong position of the Council of Lords (and in fact, a few of its most important members holding the most prominent offices) influenced for centuries the political life of Lithuania, dominated by powerful families, almost constantly playing the role of the so-called hegemons, even after they were formally equated in law with the common nobility in 1563. The Lithuanian nobility, on the other hand, was slowly gaining in the sixteenth century the right to participate in the parliamentary life of the state. In principle, however, Lithuanian nobles were deprived of the legislative and control initiative; their role was accepting and executing the ruler’s decisions agreed with the Council of Lords. Thus, they were interested in acquiring the rights of the Polish nobility, and consequently, in the Union with the Polish Crown. The establishment of the Commonwealth resulted in the incorporation of Lithuanian representatives from the senatorial group and poviat (county; Polish: powiat) nobility to the General Sejm of the Crown, in which, however, they could not play a significant role due to their small number compared to their Polish counterparts. In such a situation, it was important for the Lithuanians to maintain the principle of liberum veto, for in this way they could prevent the adoption of constitutions contrary to their interests. Throughout the whole history of the Commonwealth, the Lithuanians made efforts to ensure that their representation corresponded to the popular definition of the state of both nations (Polish and Lithuanian), and not one of its three equal provinces (Greater Poland, Little Poland, Lithuania). However, in the parliamentary system, their only success was the periodic separation of the constitutions for the Grand Duchy of Lithuania from those of the whole state. Even so, Lithuania was treated as one of three provinces, which was reflected in the election of a Lithuanian deputy as Sejm marshal every third Sejm, in the composition of Sejm commissions (1/3 of seats for Lithuanians), and finally in holding of every third Sejm in Lithuania (since 1676). While preparing the Li","PeriodicalId":42093,"journal":{"name":"Przeglad Sejmowy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69346012","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The cognitive aim of the article – considering the EU as a dynamic system – is to analyse the independent variables that determine its decisions and actions. The progressive complexity of the independent variables determining the EU has been included in the multilevel and multidimensional formula, identifying them at various levels of social life and its various planes. In particular, the focus was on EU’s independent variables operating at the level of the international system, identifying those structural ones related to the change of the system’s polarity, but also variables with qualitative characteristics conditioned by globalisation processes. At the state level, the challenges for liberal values were highlighted. In order to organise the independent variables of the UE, a framework model for their analysis was proposed.
{"title":"Unia Europejska w środowisku wielopoziomowych i wielowymiarowych zmian. Propozycja modelu analizy","authors":"M. Pietraś","doi":"10.31268/ps.2021.62","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31268/ps.2021.62","url":null,"abstract":"The cognitive aim of the article – considering the EU as a dynamic system – is to analyse the independent variables that determine its decisions and actions. The progressive complexity of the independent variables determining the EU has been included in the multilevel and multidimensional formula, identifying them at various levels of social life and its various planes. In particular, the focus was on EU’s independent variables operating at the level of the international system, identifying those structural ones related to the change of the system’s polarity, but also variables with qualitative characteristics conditioned by globalisation processes. At the state level, the challenges for liberal values were highlighted. In order to organise the independent variables of the UE, a framework model for their analysis was proposed.","PeriodicalId":42093,"journal":{"name":"Przeglad Sejmowy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69346122","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In the 1660s and 1670s, the Senate of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth consisted of between 146 and 150 members. Appointments to senatorial offices could only be made by the King, and some of them took place during Sejm sessions. There were three types of nominations for senatorial offices. The first concerned those who entered the Senate. The second referred to those who sat in the Senate and who advanced in the senatorial hierarchy. The third referred to senators who were additionally granted a second senatorial office. During the 1661–1679 Sejm sessions discussed here, senatorial appointments were usually announced right at the beginning of the session, just after the King’s proposal or the senators’ votes, but many times such decisions were also taken at the end of the Sejm. Most senatorial appointments were made at the coronation Sejm, which inaugurated the proper reign of the King-elect (the Sejms of 1669 and 1676). At the Sejm sessions discussed here, which were held in the 1660s and 1670s, 113 people were nominated for senatorial offices.
{"title":"Nominacje senatorskie na sejmach Rzeczypospolitej w latach 1661–1679","authors":"Leszek A. Wierzbicki","doi":"10.31268/ps.2021.49","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31268/ps.2021.49","url":null,"abstract":"In the 1660s and 1670s, the Senate of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth consisted of between 146 and 150 members. Appointments to senatorial offices could only be made by the King, and some of them took place during Sejm sessions. There were three types of nominations for senatorial offices. The first concerned those who entered the Senate. The second referred to those who sat in the Senate and who advanced in the senatorial hierarchy. The third referred to senators who were additionally granted a second senatorial office. During the 1661–1679 Sejm sessions discussed here, senatorial appointments were usually announced right at the beginning of the session, just after the King’s proposal or the senators’ votes, but many times such decisions were also taken at the end of the Sejm. Most senatorial appointments were made at the coronation Sejm, which inaugurated the proper reign of the King-elect (the Sejms of 1669 and 1676). At the Sejm sessions discussed here, which were held in the 1660s and 1670s, 113 people were nominated for senatorial offices.","PeriodicalId":42093,"journal":{"name":"Przeglad Sejmowy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69346233","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Since 2 September 2016, the provisions of the Act of 1 April 2016 on prohibition of propagation of communism or another totalitarian system by the names of organisational units, auxiliary units of communes, buildings, objects and devices of public utility and monuments have been in force. When determining the procedure of the proceedings provided for, the legislator gave a special role to the opinions of the Institute of National Remembrance – Commission for the Prosecution of Crimes against the Polish Nation. The aim and subject of this article is the problem analysis of the recent case law of the Supreme Administrative Court (i.e. from 2019) insofar as it relates to the legal nature and force of the opinions of the Institute of National Remembrance drawn up as a part of the proceedings based on the said Act, and an attempt to translate the conclusions arising from this analysis into possible recommendations for the Sejm.
{"title":"Charakter opinii Instytutu Pamięci Narodowej w postępowaniach dekomunizacyjnych","authors":"Jarosław Wyrembak","doi":"10.31268/ps.2021.65","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31268/ps.2021.65","url":null,"abstract":"Since 2 September 2016, the provisions of the Act of 1 April 2016 on prohibition of propagation of communism or another totalitarian system by the names of organisational units, auxiliary units of communes, buildings, objects and devices of public utility and monuments have been in force. When determining the procedure of the proceedings provided for, the legislator gave a special role to the opinions of the Institute of National Remembrance – Commission for the Prosecution of Crimes against the Polish Nation. The aim and subject of this article is the problem analysis of the recent case law of the Supreme Administrative Court (i.e. from 2019) insofar as it relates to the legal nature and force of the opinions of the Institute of National Remembrance drawn up as a part of the proceedings based on the said Act, and an attempt to translate the conclusions arising from this analysis into possible recommendations for the Sejm.","PeriodicalId":42093,"journal":{"name":"Przeglad Sejmowy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69346331","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：