Kanclerz sprawiedliwości w konstytucjonalizmie szwedzkim, finlandzkim i estońskim – wschodnio-bałtycka osobliwość czy oferta do rozważenia?

Abstract

The article is devoted to the institution of Chancellor of Justice in Sweden, Finland and Estonia. The first part focuses on the genesis of this institution in the three countries. In the second part, the author presents the political position, functions and competences of the Chancellor of Justice. Part three deals with the role of this institution in protecting the rule of law. This work is of a legal comparative nature and includes analysis of the original political system. The fundamental asset of the institution of Chancellor of Justice remains its substantive (meritocratic) character: the requirement of high legal qualifications, objectivity, stability (lack of connection with the political rotation of government teams), and the circle of rights and rules of functioning verified by experience. The effects are also encouraging: stability of legal regulations and their systemic coherence, trust in the legitimacy of the actions of public authorities, and a degree of trust in state officials. These advantages, prompting the institution to “take over” by other political systems and its adaptation on the basis of their political systems, are hampered by poor knowledge of the institution itself, its status and powers.