Public prosecution service has an irreplaceable place in the system of state authorities. However, the years of authoritarian regimes transformed independent public prosecution authorities existing on the territory of Slovakia and the Czech Republic into authorities protecting primarily the regime and persecuting all persons who were non-compliant with this regime. It was not until the fall of Communism in 1989 that a change came – a return to the original mission of public prosecution service (the independent protection of law). However, after the division of the Czechoslovakia in 1993 opinion plurality and the lack of a clear opinion on the nature of the public prosecution service resulted in the creation of two relatively different models – the model of prokuratúra in Slovakia and the model of státní zastupitelství in the Czech Republic. This is the reason why the author of this paper deals with the constitutional status of public prosecution service in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. He analyses public prosecution service as a constitutional institution in general and then by comparison he focuses on constitutional regulation of the Slovak and Czech public prosecution service. The final parts contain brief evaluation of the current legal status and some possible considerations de constitutione ferenda.

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 seeks to identify the characteristic features of judicial cosmopolitanism and its product – the emancipation of judges from the constraints of national law. Cosmopolitanism manifests itself in creating normative systems outside and above traditional international law. While the latter draws its binding power from the will of states, cosmopolitan rules are usually created by private actors. Their binding power results predominantly from practical necessity. Such is the status of lex sportiva, of the standards imposed by rating agencies, or of international accreditation bodies. Judicial cosmopolitanism is different, for it rests upon the existing structures and competencies. By resorting to alien legal sources judges free themselves from national constraints, thus enhancing their power and independence. In assessing the impact of cosmopolitanism, one has to differentiate between looking up to foreign laws and precedents as binding sources, and treating them as merely intellectual inspiration. The second, albeit it seems innocuous, entails serious perils to the quality of adjudication. It creates a danger of cherry-picking by selecting foreign inspirations, not necessarily best suited to the case at hand. There is a danger of judicial overstepping of powers by making laws instead of merely applying it. By allowing judges to venture the uncontrolled expansion of their powers we endanger the very essence of the rule of law. On a positive note, drawing on foreign legal sources enables judges to verify the rationality of their decisions, as they were already tested in other jurisdictions.

The paper analyses a referendum on Scotland’s independence held on 18 September 2014, in particular within the legislative and political framework of the devolution settlement, implemented across the United Kingdom since 1997. Development of Scottish political separatism under the Scottish National Party and its long-time leader Alex Salmond has led to radical changes in the pattern of politics in Scotland. The pro independence SNP has ruled in Edinburgh since 2007, first through a minority government and then securing an absolute majority at Holyrood. It had consistently pushed for a referendum on independence and, after several months of negotiations, managed to sign on 15 October 2012 the Edinburgh Agreement with the British government. The Agreement paved the way for legislation regarding the referendum, in the form of the Scottish Independence Referendum (Franchise) Act and the Scottish Independence Referendum Act. “Yes” vote on 18 September would undoubtedly have enormous constitutional, political, economic, and social consequences for everyone involved, including the complex issues of Scotland’s EU and NATO membership, the exploitation of massive North Sea oil and gas reserves and retaining the British pound as future Scottish currency. But “No” vote would also mean significant adjustment of the British territorial constitution and considerable changes of Scotland’s relationship with the rest of the UK.

The article presents the powers of the National Council of the Judiciary of Poland in terms of their potential impact on the implementation of the principle of the independence of judges and independence of courts. During the initial analysis of legal regulations of individual competences of the Council the author attempts to assess their potential impact or lack thereof on the implementation of art.186 of the Constitution. This may be a contribution to the evaluation of the National Council of the Judiciary of Poland and its relations with other state authorities.

The paper presents a comparative analysis of the institutions responsible for the election, promotions and nominations of judges in France, Germany and Poland. At the very eginning – in the introduction – the genesis of institutions which are equivalents of the National Council of the Judiciary was presented, starting from the philosophical basis for the idea of the independence of courts and judges, through international regulations to the constitutions of individual states. The main part was divided into 3 sections: a brief description of the judiciary, the composition of the institution responsible for the election of judges and the manner of appointing its members, and the competence of the council and the manner of appointing judges. Each of these issues was divided by the selected countries, thanks to which it will be possible to get a clear picture of how these institutions work in individual countries. As a summary, conclusions about how the principle of judiciary independence is met in selected countries, and whether meeting this principle depends exclusively on legal framework.

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.

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.

The paper presents a comparative analysis of the institutions responsible for the election, promotions and nominations of judges in France, Germany and Poland. At the very eginning – in the introduction – the genesis of institutions which are equivalents of the National Council of the Judiciary was presented, starting from the philosophical basis for the idea of the independence of courts and judges, through international regulations to the constitutions of individual states. The main part was divided into 3 sections: a brief description of the judiciary, the composition of the institution responsible for the election of judges and the manner of appointing its members, and the competence of the council and the manner of appointing judges. Each of these issues was divided by the selected countries, thanks to which it will be possible to get a clear picture of how these institutions work in individual countries. As a summary, conclusions about how the principle of judiciary independence is met in selected countries, and whether meeting this principle depends exclusively on legal framework.

The article presents the status of an assessor in the court of law in accordance with applicable legal provisions. For the needs of the study, the most important competences of the assessor were chosen in relation to the principle of judicial independence and independence of the courts. Additionally, the most important stages of shaping the institution of the assessor from 1928 were also approximated.

The success of further development of Ukraine as sovereign and independent, democratic, social, constitutional state now, more than ever earlier, depends on determination of politicians, statesmen and public employees and adherence to principles of each citizen and civil society in general in fight against the external and internal enemy. Among internal enemies of Ukraine corruption which makes impossible effective economic, social and humanitarian development of Ukraine is high on the list, slows down the European integration of Ukraine, and at the end advantageous of external foes of our state. Therefore, eradication of corruption is one of the most important functions of the Ukrainian state now. The important place in system of subjects of forming and implementation of the state anti-corruption policy belongs to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, the President of Ukraine and the Cabinet of Ukraine. So, the parliament in Ukraine creates legal including the legal framework of the state anti-corruption policy, and also participates in forming of contest committees on election of special subjects of the prevention and counteraction. The head of state in Ukraine also defines essence and the maintenance of the state anti-corruption policy in the decrees, and also participates in forming of the commissions on selection and appointments of officials of specially authorized bodies according to the prevention and counteraction of corruption, and provides independence in activity of some of these bodies. The government of Ukraine provides complex implementation of the state anti-corruption policy, has own representation in contest committees which carry out forming of specially authorized bodies of prevention and counteraction of corruption (National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine, etc.), And also performs the common directorship and coordination of activity of National police of Ukraine and National Agency for Prevention of Corruption. At the same time, the success of prevention and counteraction of corruption in Ukraine depends on efficiency of interaction of the supreme bodies of the government in the field of forming and implementation of the state anti-corruption policy.