Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica (AUCI) is the main journal of the Faculty of Law of Charles University. It has been published since 1954 and is one of the traditional law journals with a theoretical focus.
As a general law journal, it publishes longer studies and shorter articles on any relevant issues in legal theory and international, European and national law. AUCI also publishes material relating to current legislative issues. AUCI is a peer-reviewed journal and accepts submissions from both Czech and international authors. Contributions by foreign authors are published in their original language – Slovak, English, German, French.
AUCI is a theoretical journal for questions of state and law. It is published by Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Law, through Karolinum Press. It is published four times a year, the dates of publication can be found here.
Articles published in AUCI undergo an independent peer review process, which is anonymous on both sides. Reviewers from the field give their opinion on the scientific quality of the paper and the suitability of publication in the journal. In the case of comments, the opinion is sent back to the author with the possibility of revising the text (see Guidelines for Authors – Per Review Process for more details).
The AUCI journal (ISSN 0323-0619) is registered in the Czech National Bibliography (kept by the National Library of the Czech Republic) and in the Index to Foreign Legal Periodicals (kept by the American Association of Law Libraries). AUCI has been assigned a periodical registration number MK E 18585.
In 2021 the journal AUCI was the first journal of the Faculty of Law of Charles University to be included in the prestigious international database Scopus. This Elsevier database is the largest abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed literature in the world. The editors of the journal expect from the inclusion in the elite Scopus database not only an increase in the readership of the journal, but also an increase in interest in the publication of papers by both Czech and foreign authors.
AUCI is an open journal and all its content is published both on the faculty website and on the Karolinum Press website. Access to it is free of charge. The homepage of AUCI is on the Karolinum Press website.
The AUCI journal uses the Creative Commons license: CC BY 4.0.
Long-term archiving of the digital content of the journal is provided by Portico.
AUC IURIDICA, Vol 64 No 3 (2018), 115–127
Ustavení parlamentu při vyhlášení samostatného Československa a Polska: Dvě různé cesty s týmž cílem
[Establishing of the parliament during the process of declaring independence of Czechoslovakia and Poland: Two different ways with the same goal]
Jan Kudrna
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2018.23
published online: 03. 09. 2018
abstract
This article compares the way, how the first parliaments were established in newly declared Czechoslovakia and Poland in 1918. The Czechoslovakian political representation decided for indirect way of establishing the parliament, which was even entitled to adopt the final constitution for the new state. On the other Polish politicians decided to establish the first parliament through the general elections. Both ways were different from the point of view of legitimacy. If we understand the legitimacy derived directly from the people as the superior form, then the Polish way was formally better. On the other hand there are also different sources of legitimacy, which are acceptable in the democratic states The lack of direct legitimacy could be overcome by time. The status quo or e.g. the constitution adopted by the indirectly established parliament may be understood as accepted by the people, if it is not changed later by the parliament elected directly in general elections. That was the Czechoslovak situation. Poland, which decided in favour of direct elections from the very start point, faced huge complications and was not able to provide the elections at the entire territory, as the new state was forces to conquer it firstly in many areas, which demanded in the moment of its proclamation. The Czechoslovak and Polish solution was thus different, but the result was very similar. Nonetheless, later in crucial moments of their histories both states tended to copy their first decision. Thus there could be seen some differences in their attitudes and political traditions.
keywords: Czechoslovakia; Poland; constitution; elections; parliament; legitimacy; 1918; 1992
references (9)
1. HODÁČ, F.: Doklady o přípravách k politickému a hospodářskému převratu. Obzor národohospodářský. Praha: J. Otto, spol. s r. o., 1926, ročník XXXI
2. JIČÍNSKÝ, Z.: K legitimitě parlamentu samostatné ČR. in: KYSELA, J. (ed.): Deset let Ústavy České republiky? Východiska, stav, perspektivy. Praha: Eurolex Bohemia, 2003
3. KREJČÍ, O.: Kniha o volbách. Praha: Victoria Publishing, 1994
4. KUDRNA. J.: „Ke způsobu ustavení zákonodárných orgánů při vzniku samostatného Československa a Polska“ in: KLÍMA, K., JIRÁSEK, J.: Pocta Jánu Gronskému. Plzeň: Aleš Čeněk, 2008
5. MALENOVSKÝ, J.: O legitimitě a výkladu české Ústavy na konci století existence moderního českého státu. Právník. 2013, roč. 152, č. 8
6. PEROUTKA, F. Budování státu. I. díl. Praha: Nakladatelství Lidové noviny, 1991
7. SOUKUP, F.: 28. říjen 1918. II. díl. Praha: Orbis, 1928
8. SVOBODA, V.: Okolnosti a techniky vzniku a změn ústav se zvláštním zřetelem ke vzniku ústavy České republiky. Právník. 2018, roč. 156, č. 1
9. VAVŘÍNEK, F.: Základy práva ústavního. Díl I. Praha: Všehrd, 1920
Ustavení parlamentu při vyhlášení samostatného Československa a Polska: Dvě různé cesty s týmž cílem is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
230 x 157 mm
periodicity: 4 x per year
print price: 65 czk
ISSN: 0323-0619
E-ISSN: 2336-6478
