Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Społecznej
Journal of the Polish Section of IVR (ISSN:2082-3304)
Language: polish
Published: Number 1(46)/2026, pp. 112–117.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36280/AFPiFS.2026.1.112
DownloadNumber of downloads: 217
This text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
English abstract: In this article, I analyse Legislative Theatre from a socio-legal perspective, for the first time in reflections on this topic. By analysing the context of participatory processes, I outline the background for Legislative Theatre, where participation or its manifestations play a significant role. In the article, I both present the origins of Legislative Theatre – as a process used to generate ideas for legal amendments or their implementation – and compare the original assumptions with contemporary challenges or contexts important for legal scholarship. The article focuses on an analysis of the original assumptions of Legislative Theatre, confronting and comparing them, where necessary, with the contemporary approach. At the same time, I claim that Legislative Theatre, despite its name, should be understood in terms of participation, rather than legislation, in particular the ambition to influence the legislative process (initiative). These considerations are one of the first attempts to look at Legislative Theatre as a potentially important theme for both academics and practitioners, for both actors and audiences (if any) of legal systems. At the same time, they are an attempt to embed Legislative Theatre as a theme for a wider reflection of legal scholars, including Polish ones.
Key words: socially engaged theatre, participation, Legislative Theatre, legislation, law
Language: polish
Published: Number 1(46)/2026, pp. 77–95.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36280/AFPiFS.2026.1.77
DownloadNumber of downloads: 194
This text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
English abstract: In Western political tradition, judges are guardians of the rule of law. But they also may be subject to mistakes or corruption. A well-balanced system of government needs both means to guard judicial independence and means to control the judiciary, such as removal from office. Judges of senior courts (in the UK) and federal judges (in the USA) are secured in their independence by the ‘good behaviour’ clause, which makes removing them possible only if a specific action is taken by the legislature. In the UK it is an address of both Houses to the Monarch, in the USA – an impeachment. This article deals with historical roots of the ‘good behaviour’ clause and its current understanding. It stresses that in the process of the interpretation and through certain precedents, the scope of the legislature’s power to remove a judge was highly restricted. Such a restriction, however, was obtained rather due to a political culture of the analysed countries rather than the contents of the ‘good behaviour’ clause, which always carries with it the danger of political interference with the judiciary.
Key words: judiciary, removal from office, judges, UK, USA
Language: polish
Published: Number 1(46)/2026, pp. 60–76.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36280/AFPiFS.2026.1.60
DownloadLiczba pobrań: 146
This text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
English abstract: One of the most important issues recently addressed in the literature is the threat to democracy and the rule of law. It is pointed out that the necessity of verifying the role and tasks of key political institutions, primarily the state, is determined by the nature and dynamics of changes occurring in the modern world. The issue of threats to democracy and the crisis of the rule of law has frequently been discussed in Polish theoretical and doctrinal legal works produced after 1926. Authors such as Sz. Rundstein and Sz. Starzewski often raised concerns about the dangers associated with phenomena referred to as “anti-constitutional tendencies.” Their published studies addressed both internal threats and the dangers arising from the formation of fascist states and the Soviet state. The findings made at that time remain highly relevant today. Therefore, in the context of the challenges faced by legal practice and legal science today, it seems justified to recall the conclusions formulated nearly 100 years ago.
Key words: Fascism, democracy, rule of law, total state, authoritarianism, civil rights, Nazi and Soviet totalism
Language: polish
Published:Number 4(2025), pp. 58–76.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36280/AFPiFS.2025.4.58
Number of downloads: 220,594
This text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
English abstract: The question of freedom of expression involves more than just the ability to voice an idea; it also encompasses the broader context in which such expression emerges. Nevertheless, in legal discussions the focus is often narrowed to the boundaries of what may or may not be said. These discussions frequently remain confined within a binary framework of restriction versus protection, primarily through legal instruments, and seldom move beyond this limited perspective. In line with Schauer’s view, the legal approach tends to classify and reach definitive judgments “by its very nature”. Yet, as Schauer himself underlines, this does not mean that freedom of expression and/or academic freedom is valuable solely for its own sake. Schauer’s framework, therefore, offers a way to move past the confines of strictly legalistic debates. He provides not only a legal but also a philosophical basis for examining how expression is either restricted or protected.
This article does not attempt to explore the entirety of Schauer’s arguments on freedom of expression. Instead, it concentrates on evaluating how the Turkish administrative judiciary approaches academic freedom of expression, particularly from the point of view of the tension between restriction and protection. The central question it addresses is: What are the protective and restraining dynamics shaping academic freedom of expression in the case law of Turkish administrative courts, especially in the context of the Academics for Peace? Drawing on Schauer’s analysis of the instrumental function of expression and the institutional limits placed on academic freedom, the article argues that the core issue lies not only within the judiciary but also in structural constraints, such as universities and academic hierarchies, that may foster self-censorship.
Keywords:freedom of expression, academic freedom, Frederick Schauer, Turkish administrative judiciary, Academics for Peace, self-censorship
Language: English.
Published: Number 4(2025), pp. 46–57.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36280/AFPiFS.2025.4.46
Number of downloads: 220,594
This text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
English abstract: The subject of the article is an attempt to evaluate the events that took place in Radom in 1976 from the perspective of the tools used by Law & Economics. The basic aim of the article is to attempt to answer the question whether, if the legislator had used the Law & Economics assumptions in the lawmaking process during the communist period, there would have been social unrest in Radom and other parts of the country. Unrest, during which the personal interests of their participants were violated, and, simply put, crimes were committed against the people who participated in them. An additional objective of the article is to present the basic assumptions of the Law & Economics theory and its main currents.
Keywords: protests in Radom in 1976, Law & Economics (economic analysis of law), philosophy of law, social philosophy
Language: Polish
Published: Number 3(44)/2025, pp. 156-166.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36280/AFPiFS.2025.3.156
Download: Download
Number of downloads: 162
This text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
English abstract: The paper deals with the question of legal punishment of crimes, in particular crimes against life and freedom, which were committed in the former socialist states of Central and Eastern Europe in the name of the State or at least with its tacit approval. This question is discussed in the paper from the perspectives of legal theory and comparative law.
After clarifying the concept of “communist crimes”, which in countries such as Poland is even a legal concept of applicable law, the first part of the paper examines the legal-theoretical and legal-philosophical problems of criminal penalties for massive human rights violations committed under the laws of the socialist era. As legal-theoretical polar opposites in this regard, it presents the position of Gustav Radbruch with his two famous formulae and the position of Hans Kelsen’s legal positivism. It points out that in the case of communist crimes only the first of Radbruch’s two formulae, the “intolerability formula” can be applied.
The perspective of comparative law is the subject of the second part of the paper. It shows that the spectrum of criminal-law dealing with the communist past since 1989 ranges from a relatively systematic legal prosecution of at least the most serious human rights violation, for example in the cases of homicides at the former inner German border, to complete non-prosecution by the judiciary of Eastern European states such as Russia, Belarus, Georgia, Bulgaria or Croatia. Where criminal prosecution took place, the question arose not only of the statute of limitations, but also of the nulla poena sine lege principle. This principle, which is based on the rule of law, is not only important with respect to the validity of statutory law during the communist era, but also with regard to the different interpretative practices of courts in the former socialist states.
Keywords: legal reassessment of communist crimes, post-socialist states of Central and Eastern Europe, Kelsen’s legal positivism, Radbruch’s two formulae, rule of law, nulla poena sine lege
Language: English
Published: Number 3(44)/2025, pp. 138-155.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36280/AFPiFS.2025.3.138
Download: Download
Number of downloads: 206
This text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
English abstract: One of the most important issues recently addressed in literature is the threats to democracy and the rule of law. It is pointed out that the need to verify the role and tasks of key political institutions, primarily the state, is determined by the nature and dynamics of changes in the modern world. The issue of threats to democracy and the crisis of the rule of law has frequently been discussed in Polish theoretical and doctrinal legal works produced after 1926. Authors such as Szymon Rundstein and Maciej Starzewski often raised concerns about the dangers associated with phenomena referred to as “anti-constitutional tendencies”. The studies they published addressed both internal threats and the dangers arising from the formation of fascist states and the Soviet state. The findings made back then remain highly relevant in the present day. Therefore, in the context of the challenges faced by legal practice and legal science today, it seems justified to recall the conclusions formulated nearly 100 years ago.
Keywords: Fascism, democracy, rule of law, total state, authoritarianism, civil rights, Nazi and Soviet totalisms
Language: English
Published: Number 3(44)/2025, pp. 38-54.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36280/AFPiFS.2025.3.38
Download: Download
Number of downloads: 237
This text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
English abstract: The aim of this article is an attempt to conceptualize Jerzy Wroblewski’s theory of legal interpretation in the context of examining the influence of Marxism on interpretative practices. One of the legal theorists who undertook the task of demonstrating that Jerzy Wroblewski’s theory of interpretation is characterized by a philosophical stance rooted in the adoption of Marxist premises as the foundational philosophical assumptions underlying theoretical activities in legal science is Zbigniew Pulka. This article discusses three topics: (1) the Marxist philosophical stance – Marxist axiology, (2) people’s legal interpretation, (3) the clarificatory concept of interpretation.
Keywords: interpretation, Marxism, communism, J. Wróblewski, clarificatory concept of interpretation
Language: English
Published: Number 3(44)/2025, pp. 7-19.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36280/AFPiFS.2025.3.7
Download: Download
Number of downloads: 258
This text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Language: Polish
Published: Number 2(43)/2025, pp. 171-174.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36280/AFPiFS.2025.2.171
Download: Download
Number of downloads: 177
This text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
