Suchergebnisse

The article is aimed at assessing the regulations of the European Convention for the protection of vertebrate animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes, opened for signature in Strasbourg on 18 March 1986, and Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2010 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes in the context of their impact on the number of procedures which set out a model for the protection of animals used for scientific purposes in European countries, in the perspective of their impact on the reduction of the number of scientific procedures using animals carried out in European countries, including especially those involving the highest degree of suffering for animals. The starting point for this assessment was the identification of rules determining the admissibility of scientific use of animals in European countries and the impact that certain measures implemented under these rules may have on the reduction of the number of procedures involving animals. In principle, the analysis of these solutions is to specify the directions of further development of regulations aimed at protecting animals used for scientific purposes. ; Celem artykułu jest ocena regulacji Europejskiej Konwencji w sprawie ochrony zwierząt kręgowych wykorzystywanych do celów doświadczalnych i innych celów naukowych, sporządzonej w Strasburgu w dniu 18 marca 1986 r., oraz dyrektywy Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady 2010/63/UE z dnia 22 września 2010 r. w sprawie ochrony zwierząt wykorzystywanych do celów naukowych w kontekście ich wpływu na liczbę procedur, które wyznaczają model ochrony zwierząt wykorzystywanych do celów naukowych w państwach europejskich, w perspektywie ich wpływu na ograniczenie liczby procedur naukowych z wykorzystaniem zwierząt przeprowadzanych w państwach europejskich, w tym w szczególności procedur wiążących się z najwyższym poziomem doznawanych przez zwierzęta cierpień. Punktem wyjścia do tej oceny było określenie zasad determinujących dopuszczalność wykorzystania zwierząt do celów naukowych w państwach europejskich, a także wpływu, jaki określone środki wdrażane w ramach tych zasad mogą wywierać na ograniczenie liczby procedur z wykorzystaniem zwierząt. W założeniu analiza tych rozwiązań ma pozwolić na wskazanie kierunków dalszego rozwoju regulacji mających na celu ochronę zwierząt wykorzystywanych w celach naukowych.

Reserved contracts are a legal instrument that allows the promotion of those economic operators who, as part of their business, pursue also social goals. Pursuant to Article 22 (2) of the Act of 29 January 2004 – Public Procurement Law (Journal of Laws 2018, item 1986 as amended), they may only be applied for by sheltered workshops and other economic operators whose activities include the social and professional integration of members of socially marginalised groups. Unfortunately, the use of reserved contracts is in practice marginal, which is also caused by difficulties in interpretation of national laws. The article discusses the institution of reserved contracts and the terms of application thereof, in the context of the EU legislation. ; Zamówienia zastrzeżone są prawnym instrumentem pozwalającym promować tych wykonawców, którzy w ramach prowadzonej działalności realizują także cele społeczne. O ich udzielenie, na gruncie art. 22 ust. 2 ustawy z dnia 29 stycznia 2004 r. – Prawo zamówień publicznych (Dz.U. 2018, poz. 1986 z późn. zm.), mogą ubiegać się wyłącznie zakłady pracy chronionej oraz inni wykonawcy, których działalność obejmuje społeczną i zawodową integrację osób będących członkami grup społecznie marginalizowanych. Niestety, zastosowanie zamówień zastrzeżonych w praktyce jest marginalne, czemu sprzyjają także trudności interpretacyjne przepisów krajowych. W artykule została omówiona instytucja zamówień zastrzeżonych oraz warunki jej zastosowania w kontekście regulacji prawa unijnego.

Przedmiotem artykułu są regulacje unijne dotyczące dozwolonej pomocy udzielanej mediom publicznym przez państwa członkowskie Unii Europejskiej oraz praktyka ich stosowania. Celem badań jest weryfikacja następującej tezy: prawo Unii Europejskiej w sposób ogólny reguluje kwestie dozwolonej pomocy państwa dla mediów publicznych, natomiast szczegółowe wytyczne formułowane są ad causum, w wyniku kontroli Komisji Europejskiej i pod wpływem orzecznictwa Trybunału Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej. W pierwszej części autorka przedstawi regulacje unijne obowiązujące w przedmiotowej dziedzinie. Istotne znaczenie dla sektorowych zasad udzielania i kontroli pomocy państwa w obszarze radiofonii i telewizji ma komunikat Komisji z 2009 roku w sprawie stosowania zasad pomocy państwa wobec radiofonii i telewizji publicznej (Dz. Urz. UE C 257 z dnia 27 października 2009 roku). Następnie omówione zostaną wybrane orzeczenia Trybunału Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej, istotne z punktu widzenia zasad udzielania przez państwo pomocy dla mediów publicznych. ; The article discusses the European Union regulations on permitted aid provided to the public media by member states of the European Union (EU) and the practice of their application. The aim of the research is to verify the following thesis: European Union law regulates the permitted state aid to public media only generally, but detailed guidelines are formulated ad casum, as a result of the control of the European Commission and according to the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. The first part will discuss the EU regulations in this area. The important document for sectoral policies and the provision of State aid control in the area of radio and television is the Commission Communication of 2009 on the application of State aid rules to public service broadcasting (OJ. EU C 257 of 27 October 2009). Then it will be discussed selected judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union, important for the relevant rules of granting state aid to public media.

The paper deals with internal conflicts, their internationalisation and a hybrid war. In the 1990s many military conflicts could have been regarded as domestic conflicts or internationalised internal conflicts. According to the authors internationalised internal conflicts and a hybrid war have much in common. The purpose of the paper is to compare and confront distinctive characteristics of internationalised internal conflicts with the model of hybrid war. The authors scrutinize definitions of an internal, domestic conflict and a hybrid war, and the possibilities and likelihood of their occurrence. Finally the issue is analysed in terms of international public law. 'Hybrid war' is a term not defined in public international law. However it is commonly used not only by media and politicians, but also by academics in a sci- entific discourse. A question arises to what extent it is justified to use a term in the context of different military conflicts, like for instance the one in the East Ukraine that has been going on since 2015. Therefore it is necessary to explain what the term 'hybrid war' means. In order to do so, it is necessary to try to define the term. Its distinctive characteristics must be indicated. Then, many military conflicts will be analysed to determine whether they satisfy the requirements for qualifying them as a 'hybrid war' or an internationalised internal conflict. The research leads to a conclusion that an internationalised internal conflict gives many opportunities for applying to it methods characteristic of a hybrid war. In the course of an internationalised internal conflict there are many ways in which the aggressor can evade international liability and the authors attempt to answer how to prevent this. ; The paper deals with internal conflicts, their internationalisation and a hybrid war. In the 1990s many military conflicts could have been regarded as domestic conflicts or internationalised internal conflicts. According to the authors internationalised internal conflicts and a hybrid war have much in common. The purpose of the paper is to compare and confront distinctive characteristics of internationalised internal conflicts with the model of hybrid war. The authors scrutinize definitions of an internal, domestic conflict and a hybrid war, and the possibilities and likelihood of their occurrence. Finally the issue is analysed in terms of international public law. 'Hybrid war' is a term not defined in public international law. However it is commonly used not only by media and politicians, but also by academics in a sci- entific discourse. A question arises to what extent it is justified to use a term in the context of different military conflicts, like for instance the one in the East Ukraine that has been going on since 2015. Therefore it is necessary to explain what the term 'hybrid war' means. In order to do so, it is necessary to try to define the term. Its distinctive characteristics must be indicated. Then, many military conflicts will be analysed to determine whether they satisfy the requirements for qualifying them as a 'hybrid war' or an internationalised internal conflict. The research leads to a conclusion that an internationalised internal conflict gives many opportunities for applying to it methods characteristic of a hybrid war. In the course of an internationalised internal conflict there are many ways in which the aggressor can evade international liability and the authors attempt to answer how to prevent this.

The paper deals with internal conflicts, their internationalisation and a hybrid war. In the 1990s many military conflicts could have been regarded as domestic conflicts or internationalised internal conflicts. According to the authors internationalised internal conflicts and a hybrid war have much in common. The purpose of the paper is to compare and confront distinctive characteristics of internationalised internal conflicts with the model of hybrid war. The authors scrutinize definitions of an internal, domestic conflict and a hybrid war, and the possibilities and likelihood of their occurrence. Finally the issue is analysed in terms of international public law. 'Hybrid war' is a term not defined in public international law. However it is commonly used not only by media and politicians, but also by academics in a sci- entific discourse. A question arises to what extent it is justified to use a term in the context of different military conflicts, like for instance the one in the East Ukraine that has been going on since 2015. Therefore it is necessary to explain what the term 'hybrid war' means. In order to do so, it is necessary to try to define the term. Its distinctive characteristics must be indicated. Then, many military conflicts will be analysed to determine whether they satisfy the requirements for qualifying them as a 'hybrid war' or an internationalised internal conflict. The research leads to a conclusion that an internationalised internal conflict gives many opportunities for applying to it methods characteristic of a hybrid war. In the course of an internationalised internal conflict there are many ways in which the aggressor can evade international liability and the authors attempt to answer how to prevent this.

The article aims at presenting the connection between growing international cooperation of public administration in relation to organization and functioning of public service. The presentation is made with the example of the antimonopoly administration. It begins with a short description of the legal basis of international cooperation of the Polish competition authority. It is followed with a short overview of different modes of this cooperation on global, European and bilateral levels. Despite extensive international cooperation of the Polish competition authority, its internal organization is rather inefficient and fails to deliver relevant input from the international cooperation into internal works of the authority. Similarly, civil servants of the competition authority are not offered to rise their skills in relation to foreign cooperation as well as there are no transfers between jurisdictional departments and the department for the international cooperation which keeps those departments separated. ; W artykule został omówiona problematyka wzrostu międzynarodowej współpracy organów administracji publicznej oraz jej wpływu na organizację i funkcjonowanie służby publicznej. Prezentacja jest przeprowadzona na przykładzie administracji antymonopolowej. Na początku przedstawiono podstawy prawne współpracy międzynarodowej polskiego organu ochrony konkurencji. Następnie analiza objęła różne przejawy tej współpracy na szczeblu światowym, europejskim i bilateralnym. Pomimo rozwiniętej współpracy międzynarodowej polskiego organu ochrony konkurencji wewnętrzna organizacja jego urzędu jest do niej nieprzystosowana i w znacznym stopniu utrudnia przełożenie skutków tej współpracy na wykonywanie przezeń jurysdykcji administracyjnej. Jednocześnie urzędnicy UOKiK nie są szkoleni w kierunku rozwijania współpracy międzynarodowej, a brak wewnętrznych transferów pomiędzy departamentem orzeczniczym i współpracy z zagranicą powoduje, że funkcjonują one w izolacji od siebie.

The paper has the objective to present public diplomacy as a discipline requiring interdisciplinary approach. At the current stage of development of the discipline, the approach rooted in the theory of international relations is dominating. The author suggests inclusion of the tools used for the analysis of political communication into the body of research on new public diplomacy. Therefore, there is nothing more as an aggregate of paradigms and tools of two disciplines implemented at the moment.Public diplomacy was defined in the paper as a symmetrical form of international, political communication targeted at foreign public opinion in order to facilitate the achievement of the goals of state abroad. Currently, the adjective "new" as added to public diplomacy, means that new public diplomacy is different from informational public diplomacy of United States before the liquidation of USIA. The new public diplomacy acknowledges non state organizations as actors of international relations and adjusts to the logic of globalization. New public diplomacy should not be equalized with political propaganda. ; The paper has the objective to present public diplomacy as a discipline requiring interdisciplinary approach. At the current stage of development of the discipline, the approach rooted in the theory of international relations is dominating. The author suggests inclusion of the tools used for the analysis of political communication into the body of research on new public diplomacy. Therefore, there is nothing more as an aggregate of paradigms and tools of two disciplines implemented at the moment.Public diplomacy was defined in the paper as a symmetrical form of international, political communication targeted at foreign public opinion in order to facilitate the achievement of the goals of state abroad. Currently, the adjective "new" as added to public diplomacy, means that new public diplomacy is different from informational public diplomacy of United States before the liquidation of USIA. The new public diplomacy acknowledges non state organizations as actors of international relations and adjusts to the logic of globalization. New public diplomacy should not be equalized with political propaganda.

Celem tekstu jest wskazanie na nową dyplomacją publiczną jako na obszar badawczy, który wymaga podejścia interdyscyplinarnego. Na obecnym etapie rozwoju tej dyscypliny dominują podejścia badawcze i narzędzia zaczerpnięte z nauki o stosunkach międzynarodowych. Autorka postuluje włączenie podstawowych paradygmatów badań nad komunikacją polityczną do analizy nowej dyplomacji publicznej. Na razie jednak nie można wskazać takiego podejścia badawczego, które wychodziłoby poza prostą sumę metod stosowanych w nauce o stosunkach międzynarodowych i badaniach nad komunikacja polityczną. Na potrzeby artykułu dyplomacja publiczna została zdefiniowana jako symetryczna forma międzynarodowej komunikacji politycznej, której celem jest wspieranie osiągnięcia celów państwa za granicą poprzez wpływanie na opinię publiczną. Współcześnie dyplomację publiczna określa się jako "nową", aby odróżnić ją od dyplomacji publicznej Stanów Zjednoczonych, uprawianą przed 1999 r. oraz wskazać na dostosowanie tej formy komunikacji politycznej do procesów globalizacji, w tym do rosnącego znaczenia aktorów niepaństwowych w stosunkach międzynarodowych. W tym ujęciu dyplomacja publiczna nie jest tożsama z propagandą. ; The paper has the objective to present public diplomacy as a discipline requiring interdisci - plinary approach. At the current stage of development of the discipline, the approach rooted in the theory of international relations is dominating. The author suggests inclusion of the tools used for the analysis of political communication into the body of research on new public diplo - macy. Therefore, there is nothing more as an aggregate of paradigms and tools of two disciplines implemented at the moment. Public diplomacy was defined in the paper as a symmetrical form of international, political communication targeted at foreign public opinion in order to facilitate the achievement of the goals of state abroad. Currently, the adjective "new" as added to public diplomacy, means that new public diplomacy is different from informational public diplomacy of United States before the liquidation of USIA. The new public diplomacy acknowledges non state organizations as ac - tors of international relations and adjusts to the logic of globalization. New public diplomacy should not be equalized with political propaganda

Operations under the auspices of the Security Council mandate span over 70 years. Repeatedly involved in resolving armed conflicts, they have made a significant contribution to ensuring security and stability around the world. In practice, they have taken the form of operations by individual states, coalitions, other international organizations or simply as United Nations missions composed of contingents provided by Troop Contribution Countries (TCC). While operations under the auspices of the United Nations have been involved on several occasions in offensive activities under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, and the question of responsibility for these actions has been the subject of many legal analyses and judgments, missions organized by the United Nations are always recognized as neutral, and their activities as conciliatory and focused on monitoring the cessation of hostilities, or supervising the disengagement between the parties of the conflict, with the use of force limited to self-defence. Thus, such operations benefited from legal protection, and any action against them was considered a violation of international law. The current engagement of United Nations goes far beyond the traditional understanding of peacekeeping operations. UN missions are frequently authorized to employ all necessary means, up to and including the use of lethal force or even neutralization of the armed group. This creates a situation where in the light of International Humanitarian Law, such actions can be recognized as involvement in armed conflict. This article is intended to show the problems that the international community will soon face to in using United Nations' missions as an instrument for resolving armed conflicts and as a tool for restoring peace and providing stability and securityin the area of operations. It presents the processes of decision-making and subordination, which in some circumstances might result in the United Nations missions being deprived of legal protection and, in addition, made liable for non-compliance with the provisions of International Humanitarian Law. ; Operations under the auspices of the Security Council mandate span over 70 years. Repeatedly involved in resolving armed conflicts, they have made a significant contribution to ensuring security and stability around the world. In practice, they have taken the form of operations by individual states, coalitions, other international organizations or simply as United Nations missions composed of contingents provided by Troop Contribution Countries (TCC). While operations under the auspices of the United Nations have been involved on several occasions in offensive activities under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, and the question of responsibility for these actions has been the subject of many legal analyses and judgments, missions organized by the United Nations are always recognized as neutral, and their activities as conciliatory and focused on monitoring the cessation of hostilities, or supervising the disengagement between the parties of the conflict, with the use of force limited to self-defence. Thus, such operations benefited from legal protection, and any action against them was considered a violation of international law. The current engagement of United Nations goes far beyond the traditional understanding of peacekeeping operations. UN missions are frequently authorized to employ all necessary means, up to and including the use of lethal force or even neutralization of the armed group. This creates a situation where in the light of International Humanitarian Law, such actions can be recognized as involvement in armed conflict. This article is intended to show the problems that the international community will soon face to in using United Nations' missions as an instrument for resolving armed conflicts and as a tool for restoring peace and providing stability and securityin the area of operations. It presents the processes of decision-making and subordination, which in some circumstances might result in the United Nations missions being deprived of legal protection and, in addition, made liable for non-compliance with the provisions of International Humanitarian Law.