This article discusses the independent state legislature theory, which has been the subject of interest of an ever-growing group of American constitutionalists in recent years. This theory deals primarily with state legislatures’ power – derived directly from the U.S. Constitution – to regulate federal elections. According to its underlying premises, this fact results in the absence of any tools to control the law enacted in this area as to its compliance with a given state’s constitution. Neither the electoral administration nor the state courts can interfere with these laws. They would therefore be subject to federal courts’ review only. However, the Supreme Court, in applying the political questions doctrine, has excluded many election law matters – other than those concerning funding – from its jurisdiction. As a result, such an important part of state law – one concerning fundamental political rights – would remain without any supervision inherent in modern democracies.

The article covers the issue of the functioning of one of the advisory bodies of central governmental administration, i.e. the Council for Nuclear Safety and Radiation Protection Affairs, which is associated with the President of the National Atomism Agency (PAA), the chief nuclear supervision body in Poland, which is the competent authority in nuclear safety and radiation protection affairs, as defined in the Atomic Law (Prawo atomowe). The article presents the objectives of the functioning of the Council as an advisory body to the nuclear supervision authority on the basis of international and European law and the views of the nuclear energy law doctrine. In relation to the Council, an important role is played by soft law acts, especially the so-called IAEA safety standards. Despite the fact that they are not legally binding, they constitute a valuable and extensive collection of recommendations supporting regional and national legislative activity. The purpose of this study is also a critical analysis of the amendment to the Atomic Law from 2016 in the section relating to changes made to the way of shaping the Council’s make-up. They caused the loss of one of the Council’s most important attributes, i.e. independence in the decision-making process and they deprived the President of the PAA (decision-making body) of influence on shaping its make-up. The changes introduced should be interpreted as an unequivocal negation of the ratio legis of appointing the Council and a significant step backwards in relation to the existing practice and legislative trends in recent years. The author postulates restoring the previous legal solutions as the ones that will allow the Council, the advisory body, to fulfil its function in the right way, really supporting the decision-making authority for which it works.

This article explores the possibility of replacing the traditional administrative supervision over the gig industry in favour of regulatory instruments rooted in economy. While regulation in this sense is not uncommon in the Enlish-speaking countries, even outside infrastructural sectors, in continental Europe, administrative supervision of business still prevails. The current approach of states, including administration, legislative authorities and courts, towards the gig economy can be attributed to the misconception expressed in the EU and national court decisions presuming that companies such as Uber, offering an electronic platform, form one entity with thousands of businesses performing services such as Uber drivers. This paper asserts that regulatory authorities with their powers of correcting the anomalies of the market, are better suited for platform-based services. States should use their powers to liberalise doing business, rather than restrict new, inventive forms of business to the detriment of the customers.

It has been several years since the search for solutions that would improve and increase the supervision and control of tax authorities over the taxable persons’ turnover made from selling to natural persons started. The legislative activities currently undertaken in this domain (especially the implementation of online registers) are oriented towards the increasing digitalisation of the process in question, supplementing the already existing solutions (such as the obligation to file electronic VAT return forms and SAF-T [PL: JPK] files).

The Greek polis is the birthplace of a culture whose influence persisted despite the fall of the very form of polis. This culture plays a significant part in the life of communities of today, especially in the domain of the so-called Western culture. Polis means both state and city, but most of all it is “a society, a community of people living together”. This form of governance enabled equal citizens to exercise direct supervision over their governments. Polis itself was not an invention of ancient Greeks, but the public nature thereof, especially in the form of the debate-based democracy and the rule of law – not of people – turned out to be their contribution to the idea of a city-state. Democracy as a common form of a political system can be found particularly in the Greek culture of polis. The general notions deriving from the Greek polis, i.e. citizenship, democracy, equality, independence, autonomy or justice, express a desire for a better life of an individual in a community. The democracy of classical times, characterised by equal citizenship and freedom of speech, is considered as the first one to moderate fierce social-economic disputes. It is this polis that made it possible for philosophy and science to develop. The modern-day discussion on the state in a globalised and increasingly urbanised world can surely benefit from a reflection on the civil and legal dimensions of polis.

It has been several years since the search for solutions that would improve and increase the supervision and control of tax authorities over the taxable persons’ turnover made from selling to natural persons started. The legislative activities currently undertaken in this domain (especially the implementation of online registers) are oriented towards the increasing digitalisation of the process in question, supplementing the already existing solutions (such as the obligation to file electronic VAT return forms and SAF-T [PL: JPK] files).

The Greek polis is the birthplace of a culture whose influence persisted despite the fall of the very form of polis. This culture plays a significant part in the life of communities of today, especially in the domain of the so-called Western culture. Polis means both state and city, but most of all it is “a society, a community of people living together”. This form of governance enabled equal citizens to exercise direct supervision over their governments. Polis itself was not an invention of ancient Greeks, but the public nature thereof, especially in the form of the debate-based democracy and the rule of law – not of people – turned out to be their contribution to the idea of a city-state. Democracy as a common form of a political system can be found particularly in the Greek culture of polis.
The general notions deriving from the Greek polis, i.e. citizenship, democracy, equality, independence, autonomy or justice, express a desire for a better life of an individual in a community. The democracy of classical times, characterised by equal citizenship and freedom of speech, is considered as the first one to moderate fierce social-economic disputes. It is this polis that made it possible for philosophy and science to develop. The modern-day discussion on the state in a globalised and increasingly urbanised world can surely benefit from a reflection on the civil and legal dimensions of polis.

There are some typical relations that can be observed in public administration, including management, supervision, control, co-ordination and co-operation. The latter two are seldom subject to scrutiny by administration law academics. The purpose of this article is to initiate a discussion on filling this gap. In most cases, co-ordination is performed in connection with management, supervision or control. This type of co-ordination can be described as functional. However, independent co-ordination also exists. Due to the limited number of positive law regulations regarding this type of co-ordination, it is usually limited to the co-ordinating body applying non-executive measures. The co-ordination relationship in administration law is an unusual type. At least three entities are necessary for such a relationship to exist, namely a co-ordinator and two co-ordinated parties. The analysis of co-operation in public administration is possible upon considering the principle of general co-operation as a separate one. This principle could have the status of a general administration law principle, but the positive law does not currently formulate this principle directly. However, it can be derived from various applicable rules, including rules of constitutional importance. This principle dictates that all public administration entities must co-operate with each other. The article attempts to define forms of co-operation, indicating their diversity. Many issues related to co-ordination and co-operation in administration still require scientific explanation. A further stage should involve regulating these activities within the framework of the positive law. This could be implemented by future act – the “General Provisions of Administrative Law”.