Komisja Europejska opublikowała w 2009 r. zieloną księgę pt. Reforma wspólnej polityki rybołówstwa. W dokumencie tym znajdują się odniesienia do obecnej i przyszłej legislacji unijnej oraz legislacji krajowych. Zachęca to do głębszego spojrzenia w europejską i w polską legislację w tej dziedzinie. Niniejszy artykuł ukazuje pewne aspekty tego procesu z odpowiednim ukierunkowaniem na wnioski de lege ferenda.

New Polish legislation has been passed concerning sea fishing. It regulates certain matters differently from previous legislation. This article deals with this topic, but also goes beyond it. It points to the necessity of defining sea fishing sea fishing more broadly than this legislation does.

The new Polish Maritime Code is an inspiration to look at Polish maritime law as a value in itself. The article marks a beginning of such an inspection. It is designed to provoke further discussion on the topic.

The author analyzes the role of classification institutions in the system of maritime safety. The legislation of November 9, 2000 on maritime safety assigns well-described roles to classification institutions, among others. This is not new legislation since one chapter of the maritime code of 1961 addressed the issue of sea vessel safety, as did an even earlier Polish Republic presidential order of 1930. In this area, Polish maritime law complies with European law, especially with regard to Council Directive No. 94/57/WE of November 22, 1994. The executive order to art. 15, act 1, pt. 2 in the act on maritime saf ety was constructed to correspond to this directive. This refers to the order of November 20, 2002 regarding the procedure to grant approval for classification institutions to undertake the technical supervision of vessels and the types and ranges of servicing of sea-going vessels. Vessels cannot be used in maritime shipping if they do not comply with lega[ requirements regarding their construction, fixed devices, and equipment. The regulation of November 29, 2000 on maritime safety refers to intemational conventions and to the rules in this act. The controversial issue is if the minister responsible for issues regarding the maritime industry can legally approve current technical regulations regarding vessel construction, fixed devices, and equipment issued by a Polish classification institution.

Under former maritime legislation, breaching the regulations established by this legislation was considered a crime or a misdemeanor. The punishment for the latter was usually a money fine. From 1991, this kind of action was punishable by so-called financial penalties, imposed by administrative decision (in administrative procedure) by the local organs of the maritime administration. The present normalization of this material raises a host o f objections. This article discusses this process o f normalization, and casts doubt upon its legality and constitutionality.

The modifiers in the title o f this paper - “community”, “union” and “European” - are in general use with regard to the same legal phenomena. This general terminological distinction has a negative effect on the terminology of the academic study o f maritime law, and there is no reason why this should be so. The most appropriate term would be “European maritime law”. The article presents arguments in favor of the use of this term.

Although legal matters surrounding maritime administration system have been subject of extensive studies for nearly half a century, recent 90th anniversary of its foundation sparked some renewed interest in the matter. In 2010 agroup of authors, all being maritime administration practitioners, produced acollection of scientific studies on the subject. The present article adds to the discussion and formulates conclusions de lege lataand de lege ferenda.

To date, only once has the Constitutional Tribunal handed down a verdict concerning the unconstitutionality of a certain maritime legal regulation. This, of course, does not mean that the other legal regulations are constitutional. This paper presents arguments that support this thesis. Primarily, the author analyzes regulations on fisheries of 2004 and those pertaining to the Polish marine areas and the maritime administration from 1991. According to the author, mainly legal regulations regarding financial penalties are constitutionally suspect.

The author considers the issue of the institution of pilot stations. These have aroused a range of controversies in practice. Article 229 of the new Maritime Code deals with pilot stations. This regulation indicates that the director of a Maritime Office is obliged to create a pilot station, the task of which is "the organization and coordination" of pilot services and the training of pilots and candidates for the position of pilot. Pilot stations operate on the basis of regulations issued by the director of the Maritime Office.

The author of this article calls into question the suitability of the regulation in the Maritime Code relating to the division of a reward for salvage at sea. According to him, this regulation has been unclear for 30 years. He considers that the transfer of this kind of dispute to general courts may further make it difficultfor the crew ofthe salvaging vessel to obtain a part ofany reward. The division of a reward for salvage within the crew should have more precise definition inasmuch as there is an increasing number ofdisputes on this matter. This view is not reflected in the new Maritime Code; quite the reverse, it regulates this matter in an even more general and enigmatic manner, thus creating huge scopefor legal disputes.

The regulations of the new Maritime Code and the statute on maritime safety pose many practical problems. Recent court judgements and administrative decisions regarding agreements and pilot fees signal the intensification of these problems, which are addressed in this paper. Appropriate conclusions, de lege ferenda, are drawn from this, including the conclusion that the profession of sea pilot could possibly be regulated in the same manner as other professions.

The author critically discusses the legislation relating to ports and landing areas of 20 December I 996. He writes that it permits the existence and functioning in one port ofmany "managing" entities. Law relating to water is the third piece of legislation - along with those pieces relating to ports and to maritime administration - regulating the status of seaports, understood as "water and ground". The fourth piece of legislation regulating this status is that relating to trade in real estate. The author devotes a great deal of attention to payments made to ports. He also writes of payments for port services.

The author of the article sets out the view of Jan Łopuski, who considers that the duty imposed by the captain of a ship to provide help to people in danger at sea can be seen to be connected with Christian values and the love of one's neighbour. He does not, however, agree with this view, and rather holds to what Stanisław Matysik said on the subject. He maintained that the duty of saving life at sea is a result of"general human solidarity." The axiology of maritime law gives rise to many questions. Maritime legislation can draw on the achievements of general axiology and oflegal studies in general. The study ofmaritime law has not assembled a language of ethical or ethical-moral norms. The community of seafarers does not exist as a type of social entity. By the same token, there do not exist ethical or moral norms that could derive from it and be realised in maritime law. It is necessary to introduce conceptual and linguistic order into the area of maritime law. Ethics can create laws, but the implementation of everything that is an ethical norm cannot be the task of the maritime legal order.

As one of the sources of law, the Constitution of the Polish Republic mentions ,,instruments of local law" issued by, among others, the directors of maritime public institutions, on the basis of legal authorization. The first, and hitherto only, postconstitutional piece of legislation referring to instruments of local law produced by the directors of maritime public institutions is that of2000 concerning maritime safety. This settlement of the matter gives rise to some doubts on the grounds of constitutionality and of its accordance with the principles of legislative methods. It requires reworking. This article indicates directions that such reworking could take.

The normalization of marine pilotage within the maritime code, the statute of maritime safety, and the executive regulations of these statutes is controversial in many aspects regarding their technical and substantive correctness. This is especially apparent in light of the fact that the service is not provided by the state (maritime administration) but by private operators who are taking advantage of their constitutional rights to conduct business. Furthermore, the service is realized by pilots who enjoy these same rights as well as the freedom to work. This article includes a critical analysis of these regulations regarding state control of pilotage and provides material for analyses to formulate proper conclusions both de lege lata and de lege freneda. Over fifty propositions for urgent revisions of the maritime code, including the pilotage issue, have been published in the relevant literature. These regulations appear to be the weakest section of the code. However, the author analyzes only article 229. Combined with article 36 of the statute of maritime safety and executive acts for these rules, this article presents a very poor picture of the legislation in this field.

A dearth of properly formulated legal definitions undermines the clarity of the law, but so do other legislative practices. Such is the case with maritime legislation too. Most evident in the understanding and definition of vessel and ship owner, this lack of clear formulation is the subject o f the article.

The year 2009 brought significant change in public maritime law. The author discusses amendments made to Act on Marine Zones o f the Republic of Poland and Marine Administration (1991) and to Fisheries Act (2004) and a new judgment by Constitutional Tribunal The overview includes remarks de lege ferenda.

In the year 2004, no more than two years after the 2001 Maritime Code had entered into force, amendments have been made to the law on general average. The article criticizes the amendments as to their correctness and purpose. The author questions inter alia references to the dispatchers’ ethical rules of conduct as the profession itself is in decline.

‘Harbourmaster’ is a legal term, albeit without a proper legal definition. Sub-statute regulations refer to it as person in charge of ‘harbourmaster’s office’ (whichitself is a component of maritime office), and who is instrumental in the head of the maritime office’s exercise of authority in ports. However, statute-level laws give harbourmasters duties and powers which the head of the maritime office does not have. The author discusses the issue and formulates conclusions of academic nature and de lege ferenda.

The European Commission Green Paper, among other documents, describes the ongoing integration of the EU maritime policy with respect to financing and finance management. Both the Programme to support the further development of an Integrated Maritime Policy and the European Fisheries Fund are to remain operative until at least the end of 2013. The Commission, however, has proposed to merge those instruments into European Maritime and Fisheries Fund. The article provides description of the integration process and allows for an assessment of its progress.

The article discusses and evaluates current regulations and financing of fishing fleet management and adjustment to available marine bioresources.

The implementation of Common Fisheries Policy requires adequate financing and the European Fisheries Fund plays a crucial role in it. The Fund manages financial resources allocated for public aid distributed in connection with permanent cessation of fishing due to decommissioning of fishing vessels through complete scrapping. The practice is designed for balancing the strength of fishing fleets against available bioresources. This expenditure is required to conform with the EU financial guidelines and thus falls under scrutiny of the Commission and the European Court of Auditors. The ECA presents annual and special reports to the European Parliament and to the Council on this matter and provides recommendations to the Commission. The Commission responds accordingly.