The objective of the paper is to present the differences in the grounds of appeal and the appeal proceedings against judgments issued by a court composed of representatives of the public in a criminal trial at first instance. At present, citizens are allowed to adjudicate most often in one of three forms: persons adjudicating independently without the participation of a professional factor, who are not professionals in the field of law and criminal procedure (e.g. judges of the peace in the (...) common law system); a jury composed of citizens and adjudicating mostly on guilt of the accused; or lay judges adjudicating all aspects of the case in one panel together with professional judges. However, the participation of laymen in adjudication is not a prevailing rule. Many countries legal systems do not allow the citizens to co-decide in criminal cases. The paper also indicates the arguments for the democratization of the judiciary through a wider admission of citizens to participate in criminal justice. This issue has been examined on the background of three aspects of democracy: representative, deliberative and participatory. (shrink)

The objective of the paper is to present the role of the non-professional judge in Poland as an important manifestation of civic culture based on citizens’ activity in the sphere of justice among other things. The paper also highlights the importance of an appropriate selection of citizens who are to adjudicate and possibly place restrictions on access to judicial functions using the example of Polish law. The last part addresses the problem of the gradual reduction of the participation of lay (...) judges in the Polish justice system and the controversial attempts to halt this trend, such as the introduction of lay judges to the Supreme Court and the start of discussions on the introduction of the justice of the peace to common courts. (shrink)

The ruling of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of October 22, 2020 introduced a near-complete ban on abortion in Poland, as it removed from the law the embryopathological condition that allowed abortion when the fetus had an incurable, severe disease. The ruling raises a number of questions regarding the recognition of international protection of human rights, the equal protection status of human rights, and the principle of trust in the state. The Tribunal’s ruling resulted in massive public protests in Poland, the (...) adoption of condemnatory resolutions by the European Parliament, and the submission of a new bill by members of the parliament from the opposition groups. The purpose of the paper is to show the questionable ruling issued by the Constitutional Tribunal from the perspective of protection of human rights and the attempts of opposition MPs to change the legal order. The Tribunal’s ruling violates women’s human rights and is therefore a form of discrimination against women. Attempts by opposition MPs to “civilize” the right to abortion have proved unsuccessful. The jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights may establish a breakthrough, as the Tribunal has received a complaint concerning the prevention of abortion on embryopathological grounds in connection with the ruling of the Constitutional Court of October 22, 2020. (shrink)