Ustawy o ograniczonym zakresie przedmiotowym w systemie źródeł prawa w Polsce (uwagi porządkujące)

The author discusses the legal status of statutes whose scope of regulation is constitutionally limited. Quasi-specific nature of these acts in the Polish system of sources of law lies in the fact that the Constitution recognizes their subject-matter directly or indirectly, and provides or allows (by way of interpretation) for a more or less distinct procedure for their adoption. These acts include: 1) a Budget Act and an interim Budget, 2) statutes granting consent for the ratification of an international agreement, 3) statutes based on agreements between the State and religious organizations. The Budget Act must at least determine the State budget whose components as well as the rules and procedures for preparation are specified by an implementing act, namely the Public Finance Act. So, full reconstruction of the necessary contents of both the Budget Bill and the Budget Act itself is derived from another statute. The author presents the view that even if in adopting the budget bill the legislature is, to an extent, determined by the obligation to provide funds for various public purposes, the category of the so-called stiff expenditures is far too restrictive in relation to the lawmaker’s freedom of shaping the content of the Budget Act. The most explicit view on the subject matter of a statute is presented in Articles 80 and 90 of the Constitution, i.e. in respect of statutes granting consent for the ratification of certain types of international agreements. The author also examines statutes in the case of the application of simplified procedure for amendment of the TEU and TFEU, which so far has not covered by constitutional regulation. On the other hand, as concerns statutes governing relations between the State and religious organisation, the Constitution only states that their scope results directly from the agreements concluded by the Council of Ministers with their respective representatives. However, these agreements cannot contain any possible provisions, but should primarily respect the autonomy of the State and churches and religious associations, and their mutual independence.