Suchergebnisse

Traditionally, the quality of law is associated with observing certain principles of law making, the so-called principles of good legislation. Such a way of thinking, however, seems to be an over-simplification. Thus, the author indicates that the high-quality of legislation and the principles of good legislation are not the same. Law passed on the basis of good legislation procedures does not automatically result in the high-quality law, in particular, if one makes an assumption that the quality of law depends, above all, on legal certainty being ensured. The reflections presented here express an opinion on the immediate connection between the quality of law and the theory of law. In this perspective, thoughts on the quality of law resulted in an opinion how firmly the process of improvement in law quality is associated with the development of the theory of law. As regards the studies on the quality of law as a measure of legal certainty, three issues are pointed out in the material: 1. the quality of law from the point of view of its formation in reference to certain general social phenomena, 2. the quality of law relating to a person, 3. the quality of law in judicial activities.

The article concerns German discussions and plans regarding the future of the European Union and its international role. The fi rst part discusses confl icts or diff erences that burden relations between EU Member States regarding refugee policy, energy policy, the euro currency and arms policy. In addition, phenomena and processes such as nationalism and populism, Brexit and separatism are emphasized. Then the global changes are presented with which the European Union is confronted: the end of Eurocentrism, the US exit from the INF treaty, the future of the nuclear agreement with Iran and the US trade war with China. The rest of the article presents briefl y reactions in Germany, which fall into the mainstream of opinion formation, as well as concepts to overcome crises and shape the role of the European Union: democratization of the EU, the EU as a social union and a new policy of relaxation. ; Artykuł dotyczy niemieckich dyskusji i planów odnośnie przyszłości Unii Europejskiej i jej roli międzynarodowej. W pierwszej części omawiane są konfl ikty względnie różnice, które obciążają stosunki między państwami członkowskimi UE, tyczące się polityki uchodźczej, polityki energetycznej, waluty euro i polityki zbrojeniowej. Ponadto akcentowane są takie zjawiska i procesy, jak nacjonalizm i populizm, Brexit i separatyzm. Następnie prezentowane są globalne zmiany, z którymi konfrontowana jest Unia Europejska: koniec eurocentryzmu, wyjście USA z traktatu INF, przyszłość porozumienia atomowego z Iranem i wojna handlowa USA z Chinami. W dalszej części artykułu przedstawiono pokrótce reakcje w Niemczech, które mieszczą się w głównym nurcie kształtowania opinii, jak również koncepcje pozwalające przezwyciężyć kryzysy i kształtować rolę Unii Europejskiej: demokratyzacja UE, UE jako unia społeczna i nowa polityka odprężania.

The thesis aims to describe the process of European integration in the social and economic fields. The increase in the social participation of non-Governmental Organisations in the work of the European Union and the strengthening of their positions by EU instruments have resulted from the implementation of the assumptions of the so-called Lisbon Strategy. The main assumption of the presented considerations is to show the process of the formation of new European Union regulations. The reason for initiating legislative activities for charity outside the borders of the EU countries is the number of judgements of the European Court of Justice forbidding discrimination againstorganisations from different EU countries. The thesis aims to present the results of analyses obtained under the Feasibility Study commissioned by the European Commission, public consultations and the role of the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ongoing legislative process. ; Artykuł nie zawiera abstraktu w języku polskim

The study elaborates essentials, in the author's opinion, of the answer to the following query formulated at the outset: is the formation and the development of contemporary crisis phenomena related, and to what extent, to the present policies of infrastructure developement and to its attained level. A decision to elaborate this subject can be justified, on the one hand with prevalent disturbances of the economic developement in European States and on the other, with the weight attributed to infrastructure as a substantial determinant of economic changes. Relations between infrastructure and a developement of capitalist states can be characterized by means of presentation of three crucial moments. The first one incidental to the 19 c. industrial revolution, the second, resulting from Keynsian assumptions and the third one, started, in the author's opinion, in 1973 along with the oil crisis and a process of the EEC extension. As far as the socialist States are concerned, the author indicates at the significant reasons of apparent tendencies in economic practice in those States, they are rooted in the views on understanding a socialist economy, still vivid in the theory and present in the practice of economic life (e.g. identifying it with one giant enterprise), on principles and conditions of development (e.g. a tendency to allow a preferential treatment to accumulation in a distribution of national income), as well as on a practical interpretation of goals of socialist economy. Many conclusions and theses could be illustrated on account of a wide employment of statistical data on a state and a pace of transformations of economic infrastructure of the 20 European states, on utilization of infrastructure services in relation to the gained effect of GNP and on assessment of interactions between a level of infrastructure developement and a general stage of developement. ; Digitalizacja i deponowanie archiwalnych zeszytów RPEiS sfinansowane przez MNiSW w ramach realizacji umowy nr 541/P-DUN/2016

Since 2005, political life in Poland has been largely dominated by a dispute between two parties: Civic Platform (PO) and Law and Justice (PiS). This dispute is not just a rivalry between party leaders on political programs. It is rather a confrontation of the antagonistic views of the voters and supporters of both parties. The unsuccessful talks between the leadership groups of both parties, which did not lead to the formation of a coalition government in 2005 are often referred as a symbolic beginning of this conflict. The intensity of this dispute, prompts the observers of public and political life to formulatea thesis about two metaphoric Polands, two tribes that are alien to each other. Authors of the scientific and journalistic analyses of this phenomenon often point out the differences in demographic and social characteristics of the electorates of both parties. However, these differences are less important than dissimilarities in views and opinions of PO and PiS supporters on events, phenomena and persons relevant to party identities. The media also play a crucial role in supporting and reproducing different views of supporters of both parties. The purpose of this paper is to present a characteristics of the supporters of both parties and to analyze the evolution of their political likes and dislikes in the last several years. The conclusions are based on a analysis of the data collected in the years 2001–2019 by the Public Opinion Research Center (CBOS) and by other researchers. ; Od 2005 roku życie polityczne w Polsce w znaczącym stopniu zdominowane jest przez spór dwóch partii: Platformy Obywatelskiej (PO) oraz Prawa i Sprawiedliwości (PiS). Spór ten nie jest tylko rywalizacją liderów i członków partii na programy polityczne. To konfrontacja antagonistycznych światopoglądów wyborców oraz sympatyków obu partii. Jej symbolicznym początkiem są nieudane rozmowy między gremiami przywódczymi obu partii, które nie doprowadziły do powstania koalicyjnego rządu w 2005 roku. Intensywność sporu, toczonego w wielu środowiskach, skłania obserwatorów życia publicznego do formułowania tezy o dwóch metaforycznych Polskach, o dwóch obcych sobie plemionach. Autorzy naukowych i publicystycznych analiz tego fenomenu często wskazują na różnice w zakresie cech demograficznych i społecznych, jakimi charakteryzują się elektoraty obu partii. Odmienności te mają jednak drugorzędne znaczenie w stosunku do różnic w poglądach zwolenników PO i PiS na temat wydarzeń, problemów, zjawisk i osób istotnych dla partyjnych tożsamości. Istotną rolę w podtrzymywaniu i reprodukcji odmiennych światopoglądów sympatyków obu partii odgrywają media. Celem tekstu jest dokonanie charakterystyki cech oraz podzielanych poglądów sympatyków obu partii oraz analiza ewolucji ich sympatii i antypatii politycznych w ostatnich kilkunastu latach. Wnioski formułowane są na podstawie wtórnej analizy danych zebranych w latach 2001–2019 przez Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej oraz przez innych badaczy.

The article is an attempt at presentation how basic notions and ferms used by sociology of organization function in other sciences dealing with problems of organization as eg. praxiology, theory of organization and «management or psychology of organization. General reflections are concentrated around various ways of understanding of the notion of "organization" and around the so-called concept of system analysis of organization. The author advocates understand of organization as a set of rules of action or rules of functioning of groups or other human communities. He represents an opinion that organization cannot be identified in sociology with institution assi there are essential differences between them. The author attempts to present a relationship between organization and institution in sociolo¬ gical aspect on the grounds of (the proposed way of interpreting the notion of organization. The article includes critical remarks on the so-called system approach in sciences on organization. It is found that in most of the oases the system approach functions only as a language formation unable to contribuite any methodological qualities but a new slang. Treating the system approach as a new methodological directive assumes a p r i o r i , that any organization is a system which does not always correspond to social reality. For there are organizations not fulfilling their statute goals because they do not function as a system. The final part of reflections is an attempt at presentation of tasks of sociology in analysing organizations and explicating those mechanisms for the sake of practice which cause organizations to function as an integrated whole, as a social system. ; Digitalizacja i deponowanie archiwalnych zeszytów RPEiS sfinansowane przez MNiSW w ramach realizacji umowy nr 541/P-DUN/2016

The discussion of the role of self-government in Poland's political structure has been closely linked to the Polish people's aspirations and desire for freedom, democracy and a state in which sovereignty is indeed in the hands of its people. These aspirations, so strongly expressed during the general election of June 1989, have since the very beginning included demands for self-government. What it meant for the state and its political system, was the implementation of the idea embodied in the name Solidarity which, as a trade union, was also to be independent and self-governing. It was also the realisation of the demand for a 'Samorządna Rzeczpospolita' (a Self-governing Republic), one of the fundamental principles of the Solidarity movement put forward at its First National Congress, which I had the honour of chairing in 1981.In March 1990, only a few months after its election on 4 June 1989, the Polish parliament adopted a law that restored the institution of local self-government at the level of communes and municipalities (gmina). Thus, 25 years ago, the road to political transformation in Poland was opened, allowing the building of a Polish state understood as the political community of all its citizens – a real Res Publica.The predominating belief which accompanied us in this process was that the indispensable prerequisite to shaping democracy was to give back the state to its citizens, thus releasing dormant social energy and the entrepreneurial spirit of the people. After all democracy means not only the possibility of the democratically electing the political representatives (the authorities) but equally the chance for citizens to feel involved and take the responsibility for public affairs.Therefore the first democratic government, headed by Tadeusz Mazowiecki, began the process of restoring the state to its citizens from the most important starting point. It started with the rebuilding of communal and municipal self-governing structures and the recreating of the intellectual foundations for the formation of the new constitution of a citizens-centred state.This was possible mainly because a vision of reform had already been conceived and had been long developing in the minds of a number of distinguished persons. This project of self-government reform constituted an original example of engagement of Polish intellectuals in state affairs and their taking responsibility for the common good.The reform also turned out to be one of the most effective methods of de-communisation of Polish public life. This could be best seen in the results of the first election to self-governing structures in 1990, and the role which the Solidarity citizens' committees played in it. It was indeed the same people, the co-founders and members of the Solidarity movement, who have successfully carried out the restoration of self-government in Poland.'We marched for power to return it to the people' was the motto of the Polish government in 1997, a government which I had the honour of heading for the subsequent four years, and which articulated the goals and the sense of political and social transformation of those times. We called it a Four Reform Programme, and its objective was a fundamental transformation of public life in Poland. On the one hand we intended to create favourable conditions for the development of the public civic space, while on the other we strove to activate and make more dynamic the processes of economic, political and cultural development in the country.We believed that acceleration of this development and modernisation was contingent upon active participation of self-government structures. Hence the creation of strong self-government had gradually become our conscious choice and an urgent 'civilising task.' This task was grounded equally in the need to manage properly our recently regained independence, and in the need to make efficient use of the pre-accession period preceding Poland's membership of the European Union, which was then imminent.Thus the administrative reform undertaken by my government in 1999 introduced districts (powiat) as self-governing level of administration, allowing it, in conjunction with communes and municipalities (gmina), to take effective control of matters directly affecting local communities and their citizens. The self-governing structures formed at the level of strong voivodships, or regions, allowed at the same time to decentralise responsibility for regional economic development, competitiveness and modernisation strategies.Today, after over 10 years of EU membership, it is worth reflecting on the impact the political reforms which we carried through then have had on Poland's functioning in the system of European integration. We were proven right in our conviction that decentralisation and differentiation of various state functions would allow for a better and more effective use and management of EU funds.The three-tier self-government structure created solid foundations helping to satisfy better the aspirations of citizens, local communities and regions with regard to their modernisation and development. Today it is those local self-governing units, those closest to citizens, those most familiar with and with the best understanding of their needs, which are responsible for the drafting of regional development projects and the management of funds available for those projects. Self-government structures have become the real centres for formulating and implementing development strategies.This is the context in which the key challenge facing self-government is set, namely the fostering of entrepreneurship, ensuring proper conditions for innovation and mobilising citizens to engage in economic and social initiatives. The role of self-government in shaping of the state's development policy is not limited to dividing available means and resources. Much more important is its ability to effectively multiply the available means, to support partnership ventures, including public-private projects, to form strong business to business relationships as well as partner relations between research centres and local administrative bodies, or promote and support innovations and civic initiatives serving the common good. After all, all these are key factors for the long-term stability and development of our communities and our country, which is today the key measure of the responsibility for public matters, so deeply rooted in the idea of self-government.The self-government reform originated from the ideas developed in the 1980s of the twentieth century as part of the Solidarity movement, but was implemented in an already independent Poland, when laying the foundations for a transformation of the state and the democratisation of the citizen-state relationship. It also had, however, and maybe predominantly, a deep idealistic dimension, so easy to forget when we focus on the current and most urgent challenges of the present.In my opinion, it is in self-governance, as well as in the political and administrative culture, that opportunities for building our freedom lie: freedom, the sense of which we feel best if given a chance to share in the responsibility for it. In times of independence this means the possibility of personal engagement public issues based on the pro publico bono principle: issues pertaining to our family life, our local community, or the whole country.Today, in the context of our shared responsibility for the European Union, such an understanding of self-governance should also inspire us to seek new directions of development, and to participate in the shaping of Europe-wide standards of public life. In the same way as 25 years ago in Poland we founded a political community on the basis of self-governance, we should today look at self-governance as a chance to create a true political community of all European citizens.

In 2015 we celebrate the twenty-fifth anniversary of the first free local elections to self-governing bodies. Those elections activated local citizens initiatives and greatly contributed to the transformation in our social awareness, leading to real change in Poland's political regime. The underlying rationale of free local elections, however, was the package of laws adopted on 8 March 1990 which created real self-government, enabled the elections to commune and municipality councils of 27 May 1990 and introduced a new dynamic to the process of the decentralisation of the state.Changes are always the result of dreams and our ability to realise them. It is possible to make them if there exist organisational structures and institutions which allow such changes to be made. The need for political transformation had long been felt and deliberated on by those involved in spatial development or and for whom the state monopoly status quo was unacceptable. To quote the late and much missed Professor Jerzy Regulski, the implementation of self-governance was departure from the monopoly of central government, which in turn meant an actual change in the political regime. The reform of 1990 broke up five monopolies of an authoritarian state which had existed in Poland since the end of the World War II: the political monopoly of one party, of centralised power, of uniform state ownership, of public finances and the state budget, and of the uniform public administration of the state.However, it must always be remembered that the possibility of realising dreams of a change in the nature of the state was shaped in the first triumphant stage of the Solidarity period in 1989, and later became a stable basis for the future in the resolution of the First National Congress of Solidarity Delegates and in the 'Samorządna Rzeczpospolita' (A Self-governing Republic) document. The success of the real change of 1990 was rooted in the long term determination and persistence of those whose personal experiences were involved in the quest for rationality in land management. Both Professor Jerzy Regulski and Professor Michał Kulesza drew their inspiration to change the political regime from the need to ensure that society worked in a way that would allow the local needs and initiatives be articulated, and inhabitants having the ability to take concrete decisions about the surrounding environment. In this way, the existing possibility of active involvement in local initiatives, incapable of being realised in the former political system, would become a reality and the citizens would be able to make collective decisions about their local area. This would also give a chance to oppose formally the investment logic resulting from the central planning of those times.The analytic work aimed at the transformation of the political regime that Professor Regulski started in the 1970s during his employment at the University of Lodz were subsequently continued at the Economic Institute of the Polish Academy of Sciences and led to the formation of a group of individuals for whom self-governance became a core value of the new regime and a way of looking at the modern state. The change that took place in 1990 was the beginning of the building of a de-centralised, modern state, the status of which was subsequently confirmed when Poland adopted the Council of Europe Framework Convention for the European Charter of Local Self-Government. Self-government is never an institution whose constitution is ever finished. This was shown during the reform carried out by Prime Minister Jerzy Buzek's government, which continued the break-up of the monopoly of power and implemented subsidiarity principles at the regional level enabling them to exercise powers locally, in newly created districts (powiat), as well as in the later legislative changes pertaining to the regulations governing the election of mayors (wójt or burmistrz) or the work of the Komisja Wspólna Rządu i Samorządu (Joint Committee of the Government and Self-Government). Today, after 25 years of our experience with self-government, we are much more aware of the changes needed in the self-governing system. They include the strengthening of actual independence of self-government achieved through the ensured free choice of the manner in which self-government bodies will carry out their tasks, guaranteed revenues and the possibility given to commune and municipality authorities of exercising real influence on their size, improved cooperation between communes and municipalities (gmina) and districts (powiat), and, fore and foremost, by ensuring all citizens a chance of co-decision on matters which directly affect them. Changes in the regime of self-governance are a consequence of its assessment by external, independent experts but are also motivated by the natural dynamics of the changes resulting from the very essence of self-governance and its institutions, communes and municipalities (gmina), districts (powiat) and regions (voivodships).In 2010 associations of self-governing units realised the need for change and amendments to the law on self-governance. Thus, they formulated a number of proposals which were included in a document called 'Requests to the President of the Republic of Poland to commence work on the white book of territorial self-government in the year of the 20th anniversary.' This document initiated work on a draft law which in 2013 became the subject of a legislative initiative put forward by President Bronisław Komorowski. The purpose of the new law on the collaboration of self-governing bodies in local and regional development is to strengthen the role of the citizen as well as the community in the work of self-government in Poland. The effort that Professors Jerzy Regulski and Michał Kulesza in their capacity as Advisors to President Komorowski put into the legislative work remains invaluable. It is believed that the involvement of individual citizens constitutes the strength of self-government and is a guarantee of its role at the service and in the interest of communities, individual inhabitants and businesses. Hence the need for enhanced collaboration and the partnership of different bodies of self-government and the increased involvement of citizens. There is draft law that contains regulations supporting these activities.Under the draft law, a local referendum is seen as an important tool to ensure the participation of citizens in decision-making processes, including those concerning local development plans. Local referenda should constitute a mechanism used to solve local issues of material importance to residents. Their result should be binding regardless of the turnout.Self-governance helps to create and strengthen the natural inclination of individuals to act together in areas where because of their social, business or cultural ties, a local community spirit develops. In today's world of global challenges and competition, we are looking for a space for the individual which provides a feeling of security. Another important value of self-governance is the possibility of creating affiliations with a community as well as individual entrepreneurship, social activity and a regard for the collective memory of the symbols of a place. The ability to participate in community life is inseparable from the functioning of democracy at a local level, with the consultation process, election of public officers, or participation in referenda.Self-governance is a special value which gives each of us a chance to exercise a real influence on local matters. It therefore occupies a very special place where politics has a personal dimension. The variety of self-governance means at the same time a variety of development policies since there are different communities, with different emotions, different experiences or ability to participate in democratic management. This variety is a special asset in the process of the stabilisation of the state as a whole. The diversity of opinions and experiences, appointments to public office of citizens not affiliated to or necessarily recommended by any party creates the solid foundations of a democratic state. This feeling of freedom within self-governing communities must be continued and promoted.The authors of many of the texts published in this issue of Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny devoted to self-governance are, at the same time, authors of the transformation of Polish law and Poland's administration in the last 25 years. Contributions submitted by, among others, Prof. dr hab. Irena Lipowicz, Prof. Jerzy Stępień, Prof. dr hab. Jerzy Buzek, Prof. dr hab. Leon Kieres or Prof. dr hab. Hanna Gronkiewicz-Waltz are the best proof of the capital importance that self-governance plays in a democratic state. I thank Professor Teresa Rabska and the editorial staff of Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny for their active involvement in questions of self-government from the very beginning. This issue is entirely devoted to a range of legal, economic and sociological aspects of new challenges facing self-government and its regime. Once again I thank them for such active involvement and participation in the jubilee celebrations of Self-Government and this special issue of the journal.We need self-governance not only to feel that we can influence decisions being made about local issues but also to be continually able to renew our confidence in institutions at a local level, and through their collaboration at the national level.