Polish-Belgian relations are not just about economics or joint membership in European institutions. Rather, they are a story of centuries-old friendship between two nations that cherish freedom. This was the leitmotif of a conference held on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries. The conference took place at the headquarters of the Belgian Ambassador in Poland on 11 April 2019, with Polish Senator Anna Maria Anders in attendance.

The article describes Family Group Conference method, which was initiated in Poland over 10 years ago by J. Przepierski. The method is presented in historical context of their theoretical foundations and particular practical assets justifying its application in work with families in a crisis situation and moments of difficulties, which might constitute an obstacle in the use of the method.

The present article attempts to discuss whether a medical conference poster intended for a specific English-speaking discourse community shares the properties of discourse colony (Hoey 1986). The author analyses 12 e-posters, which were displayed during an international neurological conference, presenting findings on epilepsy treatment. First, the author characterises the conference poster, which is followed by a description of discourse community and discourse colony. Next, the analysis of the e-posters is carried out and the results of the analysis are presented. On the basis of these results it might be said that the medical conference poster could be considered a discourse colony as it shares some of its properties.

The essence of the “border problem” between Poland and the FRG reaches back to the provisions of the Potsdam Agreement of 1945. The Polish position was unambiguous from the beginning: the border on the Odra and Nysa Łużycka rivers was established under international law in the Potsdam Agreement, while the subsequent actions undertaken within the framework of the “peace settlement” could only have complementary, declaratory significance. On the other hand, in the FRG an official legal position was developed according to which the former eastern German territories were only given to Poland (and the USSR) “under their administration”, and the final decision on the border was left to be taken by the future unified Germany in a “peace treaty” or a “peace settlement”. This position was not changed by the Normalization Treaty between Poland and the FRG of 1970, because it was interpreted in the FRG as only a “treaty about the renunciation of force”, an element of a modus vivendi which was to last until the unification of Germany. On the other hand, the Zgorzelec Treaty of 1950 between Poland and the GDR was interpreted as not binding for the future unified Germany. Such a position deeply destabilized political relations between the FRG and Poland in the post-war period and had a conflict-generating significance in a number of areas. At the beginning of 1990 the political changes in Poland coincided with the process of German unification. The democratic opposition in Poland, and thereafter the government of Tadeusz Mazowiecki, unequivocally supported the right of the German people to self-determination, at the same time expecting an unequivocal position on the Polish-German border. This fundamental problem was closed in 1990 under two international agreements: the Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany (2+4 Treaty) and the Treaty between the Federal Republic of Germany (united Germany) and the Republic of Poland on the confirmation of the border between them. Thus for thirty-plus years now the “border problem” has been removed from the agenda of political discussions in Polish-German relations, which proves the effectiveness and durability of the agreement reached, which was reflected in both treaties.

The article is devoted to the memory of Professor Franciszek Ziejka, Rector of Jagiellonian University (1999–2005) and presents the most important areas of his outstanding activity. The Professor was a historian of literature, an expert in Polish culture of XIX century – especially so called “Young Poland” period – and an excellent promoter of Polish literature and history. He had a significant impact on the development of academic life in Poland, as Chairman of the Conference of Rectors of Academic Schools in Poland and initiator of changes to the regulations governing higher education in Poland. Professor Franciszek Ziejka passed away 19 of July 2020.

The issue of war reparations was a subject of controversy in Polish-German relations for a long time. This was due to the position of the Federal Republic of Germany that this issue had been deferred to the moment of German unification. The German concept of reparations also included the individual claims of Polish victims of National Socialism (Nazism). The case for interstate reparations from Germany to Poland was closed as a result of the Polish waiver of 1953, while the issue of individual compensation for Polish victims was symbolically resolved as a result of agreements between Poland and the Federal Republic of Germany only in 1990 and 2000. The scope and amount of any new payments depends on the agreements of particular countries or organizations with the Federal Republic of Germany. As long as the victims are still alive, new pragmatic solutions should not be ruled out.

Post-Versailles Europe saw the emergence of new, quasi-state territorial corporations (enjoying a great deal of autonomy, but not sovereignty). These included the Free State of Fiume/Rijeka (1919- 1924), Free City of Danzig/Gdańsk (1920-1939), Free State of Memel/ Klaipeda (which emerged between 1920 and 1923, before being incorporated into Lithuania with partial autonomy still remaining), as well as, slightly later, the autonomous Åland Islands (1922), and the Republic of Hatay (1938-1939). In theory, those international law constructs were supposed to resolve tensions (including those erupting on the grounds of nationality) between neighbours vying for control over strategic territories (and cities). However, they proved to primarily spark new conflicts of varying length. The article constitutes an attempt at comparing the geneses and development of the first three of the abovementioned “free cities”, as well as identifying their role in the newly-formed League of Nations. In addition, the article attempts to determine the degree to which the principle of national self-determination played a role in the establishment of these entities, as well as the methods used to ensure that the national minorities which found themselves within the borders of these “free cities” were protected.

The study addresses the challenges facing the law of the sea. Although UNCLOS is rightly described as a constitution of the law of the sea, it does not and cannot give answers to all problems and doubts that arise in practice and that are related to global warming, protection of biodiversity, legal status of genetic resources, controversy concerning shipping, delimitation of areas or the protection of underwater cultural heritage. Hence the question arises, what the ways and means of further development of the law of the sea are. Undoubtedly, one of the possibilities is to develop implementation agreements, of which the third devoted to the protection and sustainable use of marine biodiversity outside national jurisdiction is the subject of an international conference convened by the General Assembly, whose resolutions in the area of the law of the sea play an important role. Undoubtedly, also the importance of the organization of the United Nations system, such as the IMO, FAO, UNESCO, UNEP is significant. There is also the possibility of accepting agreements addressing the issues left by UNCLOS without solution or definition. Not without significance is the soft law and the practice of states as well as the position of the organs appointed by UNCLOS.

The article presents personal memories of Professor Aleksander Koj’s alumni. Professor Aleksander Koj was a world-class biochemist of significant scientific achievements, a renowned authority in the field of acute-phase response regulation and acute-phase proteins. He was an excellent academic, a true Master, admired and followed by many Polish biochemists. Thrice he served as the Rector of the Jagiellonian University in Kraków. He navigated the University through a difficult time of political transformation in Poland, modernized the management system of the University and led to the commencement of the construction of the new University campus. He was the co-creator and the first Chairman of the Conference of Rectors of Academic Schools in Poland. He will be remembered as a devoted community worker aiming at strengthening the bond between the Polish community abroad and our homeland, propagating knowledge, promoting the concept of European integration, democracy and tolerance, as well as the collaboration between scientists, artists and men and women of culture. He was wise, righteous, and noble. Many had the honor of calling him their friend, and a great many saw in him a moral authority.