论元帅卫队司令的法律地位

IF 0.1 Q4 LAW Przeglad Sejmowy Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.31268/ps.2022.95
Małgorzata Grześków
{"title":"论元帅卫队司令的法律地位","authors":"Małgorzata Grześków","doi":"10.31268/ps.2022.95","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recently, the position of the Marshal’s Guard and the legal status of the guards employed in this formation have changed significantly. Under the provisions of the Act of 26 January 2018, the Marshal’s Guard gained the attribute of militarised service. On the basis of the solutions adopted by this regulation, the guards of the Marshal’s Guard are no longer employees of state offices but officers performing their duties on the basis of a non-employment relationships. Despite the (seemingly) identical regulations, the legal status of the Chief of the Marshal’s Guard has also changed on the basis of the 2018 Act. Currently, the Chief of the Marshal’s Guard can be both an officer of this service and a person without such an attribute. The article attempts to characterise the legal status of the Chief of the Marshal’s Guard, whose position in the state structure does not fit into the model solution used by other pragmatics. In the comparative context the service pragmatics of other militarised formations were also taken into account. Contrary to most regulations, the Chief of the Marshal’s Guard is not a central body of government administration. Besides, the Act of 26 January 2018 on the Marshal’s Guard is the only one that authorises the act of appointment to the post of head of the service not by the Prime Minister, but by the Head of the Chancellery of the Sejm. The publication attempts to establish the possible reasons for the introduction of such normative solutions. In particular, efforts were made to answer the question of whether these solutions are a consequence of the principle of the Sejm’s autonomy. Finally, the employment status of the Chief of the Marshal’s Guard is an issue that requires analysis and is discussed in the article. Taking into account the variety of forms of employment occurring in the militarised services, as well as the lack of precise statutory regulations in this field, the nature (employee or non-employee) of this employment relationship requires clarification.","PeriodicalId":42093,"journal":{"name":"Przeglad Sejmowy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Uwagi o statusie prawnym Komendanta Straży Marszałkowskiej\",\"authors\":\"Małgorzata Grześków\",\"doi\":\"10.31268/ps.2022.95\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Recently, the position of the Marshal’s Guard and the legal status of the guards employed in this formation have changed significantly. Under the provisions of the Act of 26 January 2018, the Marshal’s Guard gained the attribute of militarised service. On the basis of the solutions adopted by this regulation, the guards of the Marshal’s Guard are no longer employees of state offices but officers performing their duties on the basis of a non-employment relationships. Despite the (seemingly) identical regulations, the legal status of the Chief of the Marshal’s Guard has also changed on the basis of the 2018 Act. Currently, the Chief of the Marshal’s Guard can be both an officer of this service and a person without such an attribute. The article attempts to characterise the legal status of the Chief of the Marshal’s Guard, whose position in the state structure does not fit into the model solution used by other pragmatics. In the comparative context the service pragmatics of other militarised formations were also taken into account. Contrary to most regulations, the Chief of the Marshal’s Guard is not a central body of government administration. Besides, the Act of 26 January 2018 on the Marshal’s Guard is the only one that authorises the act of appointment to the post of head of the service not by the Prime Minister, but by the Head of the Chancellery of the Sejm. The publication attempts to establish the possible reasons for the introduction of such normative solutions. In particular, efforts were made to answer the question of whether these solutions are a consequence of the principle of the Sejm’s autonomy. Finally, the employment status of the Chief of the Marshal’s Guard is an issue that requires analysis and is discussed in the article. Taking into account the variety of forms of employment occurring in the militarised services, as well as the lack of precise statutory regulations in this field, the nature (employee or non-employee) of this employment relationship requires clarification.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42093,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Przeglad Sejmowy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Przeglad Sejmowy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31268/ps.2022.95\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Przeglad Sejmowy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31268/ps.2022.95","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

最近,宪兵的地位和宪兵的法律地位发生了重大变化。根据2018年1月26日法案的规定,元帅卫队获得了军事化服务的属性。根据本条例采取的解决办法,宪兵卫队的警卫不再是国家机关的雇员,而是在非雇佣关系的基础上履行职责的官员。尽管(看似)相同的规定,但在2018年法案的基础上,元帅卫队部长的法律地位也发生了变化。目前,元帅近卫军队长既可以是这一服务的官员,也可以是没有这一属性的人。本文试图描述元帅卫队长的法律地位,其在国家结构中的地位并不符合其他语用学所使用的模型解决方案。在比较的背景下,其他军事化编队的服务语用学也被考虑在内。与大多数规定相反,宪兵总长不是政府管理的中央机构。此外,2018年1月26日关于元帅卫队的法案是唯一授权任命元帅卫队司令职位的法案,而不是由总理,而是由众议院总理院院长任命。该出版物试图确定引入此类规范性解决方案的可能原因。特别是作出了努力来回答这样一个问题,即这些解决办法是否是瑟姆自治原则的结果。最后,本文对武警总长的就业状况进行了分析和探讨。考虑到在军事化服务中出现的各种形式的就业,以及在这方面缺乏确切的法定条例,需要澄清这种就业关系的性质(雇员或非雇员)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Uwagi o statusie prawnym Komendanta Straży Marszałkowskiej
Recently, the position of the Marshal’s Guard and the legal status of the guards employed in this formation have changed significantly. Under the provisions of the Act of 26 January 2018, the Marshal’s Guard gained the attribute of militarised service. On the basis of the solutions adopted by this regulation, the guards of the Marshal’s Guard are no longer employees of state offices but officers performing their duties on the basis of a non-employment relationships. Despite the (seemingly) identical regulations, the legal status of the Chief of the Marshal’s Guard has also changed on the basis of the 2018 Act. Currently, the Chief of the Marshal’s Guard can be both an officer of this service and a person without such an attribute. The article attempts to characterise the legal status of the Chief of the Marshal’s Guard, whose position in the state structure does not fit into the model solution used by other pragmatics. In the comparative context the service pragmatics of other militarised formations were also taken into account. Contrary to most regulations, the Chief of the Marshal’s Guard is not a central body of government administration. Besides, the Act of 26 January 2018 on the Marshal’s Guard is the only one that authorises the act of appointment to the post of head of the service not by the Prime Minister, but by the Head of the Chancellery of the Sejm. The publication attempts to establish the possible reasons for the introduction of such normative solutions. In particular, efforts were made to answer the question of whether these solutions are a consequence of the principle of the Sejm’s autonomy. Finally, the employment status of the Chief of the Marshal’s Guard is an issue that requires analysis and is discussed in the article. Taking into account the variety of forms of employment occurring in the militarised services, as well as the lack of precise statutory regulations in this field, the nature (employee or non-employee) of this employment relationship requires clarification.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
期刊最新文献
Nowa Zelandia: Wyrok Sądu Najwyższego z dnia 21 listopada 2022 r. w sprawie Make It 16 Incorporated vs. Attorney-General (dotyczący wieku uprawniającego do głosowania w wyborach), sygn. akt SC 14/2022 Dopuszczalność odwołania od uchwał Krajowej Rady Sądownictwa w sprawach przeniesienia sędziego do innego wydziału Posłanka Wanda Ładzina (1880–1966) i jej działalność w Polsce i we Francji Uczestnictwo Sejmu i Senatu w procedurze kontroli przestrzegania zasady subsydiarności a przyszłość parlamentów narodowych w procesach decyzyjnych Unii Europejskiej Uzasadnienie orzeczeń sądowych – wybrane problemy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1