A vote of confidence for a commune head (mayor, city president) in the jurisprudence of administrative courts
 
Więcej
Ukryj
1
Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski w Olsztynie
 
 
Data nadesłania: 15-09-2022
 
 
Data ostatniej rewizji: 31-10-2022
 
 
Data akceptacji: 03-11-2022
 
 
Data publikacji: 29-11-2022
 
 
Autor do korespondencji
Stanisław Bułajewski   

Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski w Olsztynie
 
 
JoMS 2022;49(2):350-368
 
SŁOWA KLUCZOWE
DZIEDZINY
STRESZCZENIE
Objectives:
The aim of the study is to analyze the institution of a vote of confidence for the commune administrator.

Material and methods:
The article uses the dogmatic method. The doctrine views and jurisprudence were analyzed.

Results:
What makes the situation particularly dangerous is that the rulings of administrative courts are not always taken into account by local governments, but instead are exploited only in an opportunistic manner. Local lawmakers, when submitting their legislative initiatives, often make references to court verdicts that confirm their way of thinking, while omitting those that would contradict it.

Conclusions:
In this paper, I have presented selected judgments of administrative courts. My goal was not to provide a comprehensive presentation of the content, form, and mode of adoption of a resolution on a vote of confidence for a commune executive body in juxtaposition with the jurisprudence of administrative courts, but only to draw attention to the problem, which is important from the point of view of not only local legislators, but also supervisory bodies. This is because the problem involves an important issue: recognizing when a resolution of the commune council on a vote of confidence for the commune head (after meeting what conditions as to content, form, and procedure) is a legal act and when this act is illegal (in the opinion of the supervisory authority or an administrative court). This problem should not be ignored any longer. As we can easily see from the examples of judgments of administrative courts cited above, resolutions of the same content are qualified as either legal or illegal acts.

REFERENCJE (28)
1.
Bułajewski, S. (2005). Komisja rewizyjna jako pomocniczy organ rady powiatu z uwzględnieniem instytucji absolutorium,[The audit committee as an auxiliary body of the district council taking into account the institution of vote of approval], Radca Prawny no. 5.
 
2.
Bułajewski, S. (2010). Konstytucyjny obowiązek ustawowego określenia zasad i trybu stanowienia aktów prawa miejscowego – czy spełniony? [The constitutional obligation of statutory specification of the principles of and procedure for passing acts of local law – has it been fulfilled?], in: S. Bożyk, A. Jamróz, eds., Konstytucja, ustrój polityczny, system organów państwowych. Prace ofiarowane Profesorowi Marianowi Grzybowskiemu [Constitution, the political system, the system of state bodies. Works dedicated to Professor Marian Grzybowski], Wydawnictwo Temida II, Białystok.
 
3.
Bułajewski, S. (2018). Problematyka aktów prawa miejscowego w rozstrzygnięciach nadzorczych wojewody i orzeczeniach sądów administracyjnych, [The problem of acts of local law in supervisory rulings of the province governor and judgments of administrative courts], in: B. Dolnicki, ed., Źródła prawa w samorządzie terytorialnym [Sources of law in local and regional government], Wolters Kluwer, Warsaw.
 
4.
Bułajewski, S. (2020). Wojewoda jako organ nadzoru nad działalnością jednostek samorządu terytorialnego, [The province governor as the supervisory body for the activities of units of local and regional government], Toruńskie Studia Polsko-Włoskie XVI – Studi Polacco-Italiani di Toruń XVI, Toruń 2020.
 
5.
Cyrankiewicz-Gortyński, M. (2022). Uchwałę w sprawie wotum zaufania dla wójta należy uzasadnić, [A resolution on a vote of confidence for a commune head must requires the presentation of grounds], accessed on 30 July 2022, https://www.prawo.pl/samorzad/..., 515812.html).
 
6.
Stahl, M. (2006). Samorząd terytorialny w orzecznictwie sądowym. Rozbieżności i wątpliwości, [Local and regional government in court jurisprudence. Differences and doubts], Zeszyty Naukowe Sądownictwa Administracyjnego, year II, no. 6 (9).
 
7.
Uchwała w sprawie wotum zaufania dla wójta, burmistrza, prezydenta miasta musi posiadać uzasadnienie – Sądy o samorządach, [A resolution on a vote of confidence for a commune head, a mayor, or a city president must contain its grounds – Courts on local and regional government] – Biuletyn samorządowca 5/2021, accessed on 15 July 2022, https://www.doradcasamorzadu.p...).
 
8.
Wilk, J. (2022). Czy istnieje zależność między udzieleniem wotum zaufania i udzieleniem absolutorium?, [Is there a relationship between granting a vote of confidence and granting a vote of approval?], Lex 2022, electronic edition, published: QA 1249413).
 
9.
Legal acts and jurisprudence.
 
10.
Constitution of the Republic of Poland of 2 April 1997 (Journal of Laws of 1997, no. 78, item 483, as amended).
 
11.
Act of 8 March 1990 on commune-level local government (consolidated text: Journal of Laws of 2022, item 559).
 
12.
Judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court of 23 May 2013 (file ref. no. I OSK 240/13, LEX no. 1603052).
 
13.
Judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court of 1 March 2019 (file ref. no. I OSK 1348/17, LEX no. 2637320).
 
14.
Decision of the Supreme Administrative Court of 14 January 2022, file ref. no. III OSK 4896/21, published: ONSAiWSA 2022/3/48.
 
15.
Judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court of 9 February 2022 (file ref. no. III OSK 4795/21, LEX no. 3330415).
 
16.
Decision of the Supreme Administrative Court of 1 June 2022 (file ref. no. III OSK 5083/21, LEX no. 3355573).
 
17.
Judgment of the Provincial Administrative Court in Wrocław of 10 October 2019 (file ref. no. III SA/Wr 302/19, LEX no. 3014158).
 
18.
Judgment of the Provincial Administrative Court in Olsztyn of 14 November 2019 (file ref. no. II SA/Ol 785/19, LEX no. 2741804).
 
19.
Judgment of the Provincial Administrative Court in Wrocław of 5 November 2020 (file ref. no. III SA/Wr 283/20, LEX no. 3096312).
 
20.
Judgement of the Provincial Administrative Court in Szczecin of 25 February 2021 (file ref. no. II SA/Sz 669/20, LEX no. 3158539).
 
21.
Judgment of the Provincial Administrative Court in Poznań of 3 March 2021 (file ref. no. IV SA/Po 1222/20).
 
22.
Judgment of the Provincial Administrative Court in Poznań of 19 May 2021 (file ref. no. IV SA/Po 213/21, LEX no. 3187698).
 
23.
Judgement of the Provincial Administrative Court in Opole of 25 October 2021 (file ref. no. II SA/Op 492/21, LEX no. 3274080).
 
24.
Judgment of the Provincial Administrative Court in Poznań of 2 December 2021 (file ref. no. II SA/Op 492/21, LEX no. 3274080).
 
25.
Judgment of the Provincial Administrative Court in Białystok of 5 April 2022 (file ref. no. II/SA Bk 89/22, LEX no. 3337424).
 
26.
Decision of the Provincial Administrative Court in Warsaw of 8 April 2022 (file ref. no. II SA/Wa 3236/21).
 
27.
Decision of the Provincial Administrative Court in Gliwice of 11 July 2022 (file ref. no. III SA/Gl 1418/21, LEX no. 3371442).
 
28.
Decision of the Provincial Administrative Court in Rzeszów of 8 August 2022 (file ref. no. II SA/Rz 859/22, LEX no. 3389614).
 
eISSN:2391-789X
ISSN:1734-2031
Journals System - logo
Scroll to top