Search

The author, following an analysis of the above-mentioned Agreement, claims that Article 10 thereof, containing taxation provisions, meets the requirements of Article 89 (1) (5) of the Constitution. In his view, the Agreement should be ratified upon prior consent granted by statute, which means that the procedure for its ratification proposed by the Council of Ministers (on the basis of Article 89(2)) is improper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author, following an analysis of Article 10 of the above-mentioned Agreement, claims that the requirement of Article 89 (1) (5) of the Constitution has been met, which means that the Agreement should be ratified upon prior consent granted by statute. He concludes that the procedure for its ratification proposed by the Council of Ministers (Article 89(2) is improper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Decyzje is the property of Decyzje and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Przeglad Zachodni is the property of Instytut Zachodni im. Z. Wojciechowskiego and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The aim of this research paper is to evaluate the position of Germany, including the federal government and the parliamentary opposition, as regards the migration crisis in the European Union in the years 2011-2016. The first part of the article presents the course of the migration crisis in the presented time period. The second part discusses the evolution of the position of the governing coalition and the parliamentary opposition in Germany towards the first phase of the crisis in the years 2011-2014. The third part has been dedicated to analysing the position of the federal government and the parliamentary opposition towards the second phase of the crisis in the years 2015-2016. The fourth part presents the influence of the German government on the reform of the immigration and asylum policies, as well as the dynamics of the migration crisis in the European Union in the years 2015-2016. The author formulates a research hypothesis that the federal government did not control the migration crisis in the European Union but rather acted impulsively, thereby contributing to its deepening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Research Papers of the Wroclaw University of Economics / Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wroclawiu is the property of Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny we Wroclawiu and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)