This article presents the Polish practice of promulgation of international agreements since the end of World War II. It shows that the practice is at variance with the law and makes it difficult to determine the current legal situation vis-à-vis international agreements in Poland. In the conclusions the author puts forward de lege ferenda proposals which could improve the Polish promulgation practice.

This article aims to investigate the phenomenon of the rule of law promotion exercised by the EU through the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreements (DCFTAs). First, the article emphasizes the unique combination of normative and market power the EU uses to diffuse its norms through trade liberalization. Next, it provides an insight into the particularities of the European Neighbourhood Policy as a policy context for the conclusion and implementation of the Association Agreements, including the DCFTAs with Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia, as well as the conceptual problematic and scope of the rule of law as a value the EU seeks to externalize. Using the DCFTAs with Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia) as a single group case study of the transparency dimension of the rule of law, the central part of the article analyzes the DCFTAs substantive requirements, directed toward promoting transparency in the partner states (while categorizing the requirements into the most general ones; cooperation-related; and discipline-specific) and the legal mechanisms that make these clauses operational (e.g., the institutional framework of the AAs, gradual approximation and monitoring clauses, and the Dispute Settlement Mechanism). In concluding, the article summarizes the state-of-the-art of the rule of law promotion through the DCFTAs, distinguishes the major challenges the respective phenomenon faces, and emphasizes the prospects for and difficulties of using the DCFTAs as an instrument of rule of law promotion.

Progesterone (P4) is responsible for the main reproduction processes. Concentration of P4 varies widely among different determination methods, and interpretation of these values may be difficult. The objective of the current study was to assess the agreement of three different enzyme immunoassays (ELISA) in relation to radioimmunoassay (RIA) of P4 concentration assessment of beef cow serum samples. Samples were collected randomly considering high (pregnant cows) and low (non-pregnant cows) P4 concentrations. Depending on the P4 assessment method, four groups were created as follows: Group 1 – direct samples assessed by ELISA, Group 2 – extracted samples assessed by ELISA, Group 3 – samples assessed by automated ELISA, and Group 4 – samples assessed by RIA.

The mean progesterone concentration was 4.50 ng/mL, 1.24 ng/mL, 4.07 ng/mL and 4.39 ng/mL from Group 1 to Group 4, respectively. The mean difference (MD) between Group 1, Group 2 and Group 3 individually compared with Group 4 was −0.10 ± 1.24 ng/mL, 3.15 ± 3.58 ng/mL and 0.33 ± 1.42 ng/mL, and the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the differences (s) was from −0.99 to 0.78 ng/mL, from 0.59 to 5.71 ng/mL, and from −0.69 to 1.34 ng/mL, respectively. The confidence interval for the lower and upper limit of the agreement ranged from −4.12 to −1.05 ng/mL and from 0.84 to 3.91 ng/mL between Group 1 and Group 4, from −8.45 to 0.42 ng/ mL and from 5.88 to 14.75 ng/mL between Group 2 and Group 4, from −4.29 to −0.76 ng/mL, and from 1.41 to 4.94 ng/mL between Group 3 and Group 4.

Our findings show that the best agreement with RIA was observed for Group 1 and Group 3, while the agreement in the extraction method was least accurate.

The present paper investigates agreement patterns with plural controllers in Fezzani Arabic (southwestern Libya). During the last three decades, research has proved that the agreement system found in Classical Arabic is the result of a process of standardization, while agreement in the dialects feature the same type of variation observed in pre-Islamic poetry and the Qur’an. Nonhuman plural controllers, in particular, strictly require feminine singular agreement in Classical Arabic, while feminine singular alternates with feminine plural agreement in the pre-Islamic texts and the Qur’an. Most contemporary dialects exhibit a great range of variation in this field. Fezzani Arabic largely favors plural (syntactic) agreement with plural controllers. Syntactic agreement is systematic with human controllers and it represents the most frequent choice also with nonhuman ones. The main factor triggering feminine singular agreement is not humanness, bu t individuation. Within this conservative syntactic behavior, finally, masculine plural seems to be eroding feminine plural agreement with both feminine human and nonhuman controllers, for sociolinguistic reasons that still need to be investigated.

The article describes the Roman Catholic understanding of the ecumenical dialogue as stated in the Decree on ecumenism of the Second Vatican Council and in further documents of the RC Church. This ecumenical dialogue may be conducted only among Christian Churches and Church Communities as it aims the restoration of full visible unity of Christians.

The dialogue should primarily lead to the common rediscovery of the truth, and never to any kind of establishing the truth, of elaborating it or reaching the compromise. The true dialogue has nothing to do with negotiating the common position, where each party wants to force oneself upon another and to make the less concessions possible. This is because we cannot reduce the requirements of the Gospel to any kind of necessary minimum, a common basis recognized by all the churches and ecclesial communities.

Such a dialogue contains its inner dynamics, its existential dimension. The truth is personal, as Christ himself is the Truth, so the search for unity belongs to the proper essence of being a Christian. So the ecumenical dialogue is “an imperative of Christian conscience” (John Paul II), so it is something that inevitably ought to be taken and accomplished by Christians.

The ecumenical dialogue however is not the goal for itself. Neither it is only mutual recognition of Christian Communities or even common prayer. The common aimis the restoration of full visible unity of divided Churches. On the way of ecumenism we cannot limit to the prayer or the ecumenical dialogue. On the contrary – we should develop all the possible ways of collaboration, because unity of action leads to the full unity of faith. Neither the unity nor uniformity of doctrine or churchly traditions, but only the unity in one faith is the far-reaching goal of the ecumenical dialogue.

The documents of the RC Church give also clear hints how to lead the ecumenical dialogues: the dialoguing parties must be expert in theology, seeking the truth, not a victory, moving from easier topics to the more diffcult ones, trying to use the language free of polemical connotations.

Before the Second Vatican Council the Catholic Church didn’t lead any offcial ecumenical dialogue, what didn’t mean the lack of any ecumenical encounters. The first ones, however, were unoffcial and did not engage the offcial Church authority. Widespread engagement in the ecumenical dialogues in the time of popes Paul VI and John Paul II can be justly perceived as a direct fruit of the Second Vatican council and its Decree on ecumenism.

During the decades the commissions of dialogue have already elaborated thousands of pages of common statements and agreed declarations. The Churches must be however aware, that without strong effort of reception of these documents in their midst, the fruits of the dialogues will have no infuence on the reconciliation of Christians in one faith.

Even if there may be some kind of deception because of slowness of ecumenical process, we can be certain that meetings in the dialogue enabled Christians of various Churches an Church Communities to grow towards full, visible unity wanted by our Lord for His disciples.

The article shows that during the forming of grammatical category of gender in Indo-European languages, names of non-living objects and names of those animals whose sex is unimportant for humans were receiving grammatical meanings of gender on the basis of similarity or dissimilarity of designated objects with males or females. Such grammatical metaphors were based on the ideas of different peoples about some minor characteristics of persons of different sex, such as the difference between men and women with higher activity, greater size, strength and independence. By now, the metaphorical motivation of category of gender in the Russian language has survived only in certain nouns. These nouns are interrogative pronouns кто (masc.) ʻwhoʼ and что (neut.) ʻwhatʼ, paired nouns-synonyms, e. g. конь (masc.) ʻstrong horseʼ – лошадь (fem.) ʻordinary horseʼ, generic versions of nouns, e. g. ворон (masc.) ʻravenʼ – ворона (fem.) ʻcrowʼ, and nouns-occasionalisms used in speech oriented to expressiveness and creativity.

Most favoured nation (MFN) treatment and national treatment (NT) are two standards usually related to the general principle of non-discrimination. However, while the MFN treatment was undoubtedly and clearly defined already during the negotiation of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade in previous works and judgements of various international bodies, the NT standard needed to be clarified. An additional reason to concentrate on NT rules is that their content and scope may influence trade more than the scope of MFN granted. The concept of NT is also subject to relatively rare analysis in comparison with other aspects of regional trade agreements’ (RTA) rules which overlap with WTO law. The aim of this article is to analyse the scope and wording of the NT standard in various RTAs concluded by the European Union. In particular, it inquiries into the extent to which the NT clause remains universal across its different regional trade agreements, and examines the reasons (and consequences) for the differences, if any, in its formulation.

The article takes the renewed demands of the Polish government as an opportunity to examine the question of whether Germany is obliged to pay reparations to Poland. Based on an analysis of the international agreements concluded since 1945, it can be shown that the Polish government’s demands on Germany are unfounded.

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.

This contribution discusses the unresolved claims of Poland and Germany arising from the destruction, removal, and appropriation of cultural property during and immediately following the Second World War; viewed against the background of the 50th anniversary of the 1970 Warsaw Treaty and the 30th anniversary of the 1990 2+4 Treaty. It provides an analysis of the extent to which these and other bilateral treaties between Germany and Poland impose legal obligations to restore or compensate for the destruction or loss of cultural property. Finally, it suggests pragmatic solutions to overcome the convoluted political, diplomatic and legal debates in the spirit of “cultural internationalism” and in line with the proposals of the Copernicus Group of Polish and German historians.

The Western boundary of Poland was established by the Potsdam Agreement of 1945 and confirmed by the Boundary Agreement between Poland and the GDR of Gőrlitz of 1950. Poland exercised administration with respect to the adjudicated territories, but she made efforts to get the boundary recognized and confirmed by the FRG. This happened on the basis of the Warsaw Treaty of 1970. Boundary treaties are usually considered as objective regimes. It is disputable whether the Warsaw Treaty of 1970 can be classified as such a regime.

Transition of the global energy sector is in progress. The share of renewable energies has increased over time and achieved 36.6% of global electricity capacity in 2020. Marine Renewable Energy plays a substantial role in this transition. However, while marine renewable energy will contribute to less GHG emissions, and thus enhance compliance with the Paris Agreement, there are concerns over potential impacts marine renewable energy installations may have on biodiversity. Such impacts include, among others, habitat loss, collision risks, noise and electromagnetic fields. This paper addresses these issues from the perspective of international environmental law, illustrating how potentially conflicting objectives (mitigating greenhouse gas emissions and preserving biodiversity) can be accommodated. This requires a discussion of broader concepts such as no harm and precautionary action as well as detailed rules extending from marine protected areas to the discussion of specific treaty issues, even public participation, including participation of indigenous peoples. The paper aims at illustrating the ability of international law to ensure not just an environmentally sound but a biodiversity-compatible transition towards marine renewable energy.

Joint Operating Agreements (JOAs) play a pivotal role in facilitating the exploration and development of oil fields across various jurisdictions by allowing multiple parties to collaborate and share resources. However, differing perspectives and priorities among JOA participants can lead to disputes and operational inefficiencies. To ensure smooth operations and prevent potential conflicts, it is crucial that JOAs are precisely drafted and clearly define the scope and limits of joint activities. This paper examines the practical implications of sole-risk and non-consent clauses in JOAs, which aim to regulate unilateral actions by individual parties and maintain the collaborative spirit of the agreement. Sole-risk and non-consent clauses can effectively prevent disputes by specifying the boundaries of joint operations and individual party responsibilities. They ensure that parties do not extend the scope of the JOA to activities that are meant to be conducted independently, thereby preserving the agreement’s original intent. Nevertheless, these clauses must be narrowly defined in order to avoid inadvertently restricting the flexibility and collaboration that are the hallmarks of JOAs. This study analyzes various cases in which sole-risk and non-consent clauses have been implemented and evaluates their effectiveness in preventing disputes and promoting efficient joint operations. The findings reveal that when carefully drafted and unambiguously defined, these clauses can be advantageous in maintaining harmony and cooperation among JOA parties. It is evident that striking a balance between protecting individual interests and fostering collaborative endeavors in oil-field exploration and development is essential for the successful implementation of sole risk and no consent clauses within JOAs.

One of the most recent challenges in communication system and network system is the privacy and security of information and communication session. Blockchain is one of technologies that use in sensing application in different important environments such as healthcare. In healthcare the patient privacy should be protected use high security system. Key agreement protocol based on lattice ensure the authentication and high protection against different types of attack especially impersonation and man in the middle attack where the latticebased protocol is quantum-withstand protocol. Proposed improved framework using lattice based key agreement protocol for application of block chain, with security analysis of many literatures that proposed different protocols has been presented with comparative study. The resultant new framework based on lattice overcome the latency limitation of block chain in the old framework and lowered the computation cost that depend on Elliptic curve Diffie-Hellman. Also, it ensures high privacy and protection of patient’s information.