On the Lawmaking Policy, Discretion and Importance of the Rule of Law Standards

Tadeusz Biernat


The paper attempts to provide a comprehensive description of the problem of legislative discretion. The study employs two approaches to the issue, traditional and holistic. The former considers the legislative process in its essence, as decisions of legislative bodies, and their discretionary power being determined by the constitutional norms and legal regulations adopted within the lawmaking process. The latter, broader perspective on the legislative process involves other stages (including the pre-legislative stage), thus implying that the discretionary power should encompass various decision-makers. Following this approach, the scope of legislative discretion is determined not only by the legal provisions but also the principles of a democratic state of law. While the degree of (non-)compliance with the standards in question is evidently different from the violation of the rules of law, it does have a significant impact on the passed laws and the functioning of the entire legal system. It also constitutes a challenge to the courts and affects the use of discretion by judges.


discretionary legislative power; lawmaking policy; rule of law standards

Full Text:




Andreescu M., The Limits of State Power in a Democratic Society, “Journal of Civil & Legal Sciences” 2016, Vol. 5(6), DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2169-0170.1000213.

Better Regulation in Europe: An OECD Assessment of Regulatory Capacity in the 15 Original Member States of the EU, www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/44952994.pdf [access: 10.01.2020].

Biernat T., Law making policy, [in:] Politics of law and legal policy. Between modern and post-modern jurisprudence, eds. T. Biernat, M. Zirk-Sadowski, Warszawa 2008.

Biernat T., The Complexity of Contemporary Legal Systems – Dilemmas and Paradoxes of Law’s Legitimacy, [in:] Towards Recognition of Minority Groups. Legal and Communication Strategies, eds. M. Zirk-Sadowski, B. Wojciechowski, K.M. Cern, Abingdon 2014.

Biernat T., Zirk-Sadowski M., Politics of law and legal policy. Introduction, [in:] Politics of law and legal policy. Between modern and post-modern jurisprudence, eds. T. Biernat, M. Zirk-Sadowski, Warszawa 2008.

Christie G.C., An Essay on Discretion, “Duke Law Journal” 1986, No. 5, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1372667.

Gribnau J.L.M., Legitimacy of the Judiciary, “Electronic Journal of Comparative Law” 2002, Vol. 6(4), www.ejcl.org/64/art64-3.html [access: 10.01.2020].

Leszczyński L., Zagadnienia teorii stosowania prawa. Doktryna i tezy orzecznictwa, Kraków 2001.

Priel D., The Place of Legitimacy in Legal Theory, “McGill Law Journal” 2011, Vol. 57(1), https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=2127&context=scholarly_works [access: 10.01.2020].

Schlag P.J., Standards, “UCLA Law Review” 1985, Vol. 33(379).

Suchman M.C., Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches, “The Academy of Management Review” 1995, Vol. 20(3), DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/258788.

Szot A., Swoboda decyzji w stosowaniu prawa przez administrację publiczną, Lublin 2016.

Waldron J., Representative lawmaking, “Boston University Law Review” 2009, Vol. 89(335).

Wintgens L.J., Legisprudence. Practical Reason in Legislation, Farnham 2012.

Wronkowska S., What Does a Good Legislation Consist In?, “Legislative Review” 2002, No. 1.

Zamboni M., The Policy of Law. A legal Theoretical Framework, Oxford 2007.


Council of Europe Resolution 1594 (2007) – The principle of the Rule of Law Text adopted by the Standing Committee, acting on behalf of the Assembly: November 23, 2007.

European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), Rule of Law Checklist Adopted by the Venice Commission at its 106th Plenary Session (Venice, March 11–12, 2016), CDL-AD(2016)007.

Notification of the Prime Minister of 29 February 2016 on the announcement on the uniform text of the Regulation of the Prime Minister on the “Principles of legislative technique” (Journal of Laws 2016, item 283).

Opinion No. 833/2015 CDL-AD(2016)001-e. Opinion on amendments to the Act of 25 June 2015 on the Constitutional Tribunal of Poland, adopted by the Venice Commission at its 106th Plenary Session (Venice, 11–12 March 2016).

Opinion No. 892/2017 CDL-AD(2017)028. Or. Engl. European Commission for Democracy Through Law (Venice Commission) Poland opinion on the Act on the Public Prosecutor’s Office as amended.

Opinion No. 977/2019 CDL-PI(2020)002. Or. Engl. European Commission for Democracy Through Law (Venice Commission) Poland joint urgent opinion of the Venice Commission and the Directorate General of Human Rights and Rule of Law (DGI) of the Council of Europe.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17951/sil.2020.29.3.67-85
Data publikacji: 2020-06-30 09:44:34
Data złożenia artykułu: 2020-04-29 11:02:26


Total abstract view - 1150
Downloads (from 2020-06-17) - PDF - 0



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2020 Tadeusz Biernat

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.