Pandemia spowodowała zmiany w funkcjonowaniu społeczeństwa, nie omijając też wymiaru sprawiedliwości. Potrzeba zachowania dystansu społecznego przy-spieszyła zmiany w sądownictwie. Wprowadzono rozprawy zdalne. W artykule podjęto próbę odpowiedzi na pytanie, czy wobec występującego w społeczeństwie polskim zjawiska wykluczenia cyfrowego prowadzone obecnie e-rozprawy odbywają się w zgodzie z zasadą równości. Przeprowadzone przez studencką grupę badawczą badania empiryczne rozpraw zdalnych i własne doświadczenia autorki w tym zakresie składają się na materiał empiryczny wskazujący na występujące podczas rozpraw zdalnych problemy techniczne i te związane z wykluczeniem cyfrowym.

Protection of children against sexual exploitation, particularly against exploitation in cyberspace, constitutes one of the most burning issues of the modern world. The Internet is frequently used as the beginning of the road to sexually exploiting a child, and as way of earning the child’s trust and gaining physical access to them. Unfortunately, the COVID-19 pandemic and isolation resulting from it brought with them substantial threats, also in this area, whose effects will be long-term. What was observed during the pandemic was not only an increase in online traffic related to the distribution of child pornography, but also a definite increase in behaviours that may be classified as grooming. It is sometimes considered that grooming is the basic method leading to child sexual exploitation, or even its immanent feature. Relatedly, what becomes an important issue is an analysis of legal regulations that concern grooming in cyberspace, and an attempt to answer the question whether the scope and level of protection provided to children by Polish criminal law are sufficient.

The subject of the article is an analysis of the legal solutions governing the princi-ples of handling medical waste and municipal waste produced by people under quarantine during the COVID-19 pandemic together with an analysis of the impact of the instruments specified therein on the existing legislative solutions and the prospective effects of the adoption of these regulations. The paper analyses the current legal framework, highlighting the uniqueness of the legal institutions used (in the context of a province governor’s orders excluding local law regulations or statutory obligations, and contracts specifying the manner of performance of public tasks entrusted), as well as the impact of these regulations on the subsequent operation of waste management facilities. At the same time, a number of practical problems that may arise in connection with the application of solutions provided under the existing law have been brought to light.

In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, the legislator decided to increase the capacity of public administration to operate. Therefore, the provisions of the special act introduced additional tools for the voivode. As a result, a special type of voivode’s „command” was introduced into the legal system. He can now outsource activities to selected authorities and entities in his voivodeship. The paper attempts to locate this new competence in the catalog of legal forms of the voivode’s activity and an attempt to perform a systemic assessment of the compliance of this instrument with the existing models of administrative law.

The article examines theoretical and practical problems concerning the realisation of participatory democracy’s potential for forming and implementing state policy on counteracting epidemics. The article is aimed at the study of participatory democracy as a tool of state’s interaction with the public while counteracting epidemics throughout history, from antiquity to the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic. Comparative, comparative legal, systemic-structural, dialectical, historical and other scientific methods have been employed to examine the issues discussed in the article. The application of the aforementioned methods is conducted on the interdisciplinary scientific basis.

The COVID-19 pandemic, placing societies and governments in an exceptional situation in every respect, has had an impact on the legal order of individual countries. It pressed them, on the one hand, to take swift and decisive actions and, on the other hand – to a necessary thorough assessment and considering of the costs and consequences, both legal and economic, of the introduced measures, often related to the constraints of constitutionally guaranteed civil liberties. Although Sweden during the pandemic seemingly chose a path different from other European countries, keeping social life largely unaffected, in its essence this strategy did not differ much from those used in other countries. The aim of the article is to present the solutions adopted in Sweden and to analyse the Swedish strategy against the background of constitutional civil liberties.

The Schengen legislation is an integral part of the EU law, which translates into a right to free movement within the “borderless area”. This right can be, however, restricted, especially in the light of threats to public safety and order – and, less frequently, to public health. The restriction imposed on account of the above has become an event without precedent in Schengen’s history of over 30 years. The legal measures implemented on borders are absolutely exceptional on a global scale. One of them is the temporary
estoration of control at the internal borders of the EU Member States. The other is the “restriction on non-essential travel to the EU”, meaning, in fact, closing of the EU external borders to citizens of third countries. One could propose a thesis that even the most significant achievements in the process of integration, including the Schengen Area, are temporarily inactivated in the face of an unpredictable supra-European threat. The mission of the EU and its Member States is to establish a new set of rules that will help the Schengen Area survive the early phase of the pandemic by suspending its main principles for some period of time. Will these new rules be extended? And if so – on what conditions? How will it affect the future of the Schengen Area? These issues have not yet been featured and discussed in scientific publications given the recency and relevance of the subject, neither have they been presented in a legal-dogmatic context