This paper aims to answer the question whether the concept of dividing a criminal trial into two phases is still useful now, more than half a century after its last broader analysis. It also attempts to solve some specific problems related to the said analysis. The starting point for the considerations contained in the paper was to look at the concept of a two-phase criminal trial as a purely procedural construction and thus to reject its functional link with any model of substantive criminal law. The first part of the paper discusses the history of the concept of a two-phase criminal trial, as well as some of the arguments put forward by its supporters and opponents. In the course of further deliberations, the focus is on searching for elements of the concept in the current legal status. The final part of the text deals with the question whether and, possibly, in what form the concept of division of jurisdictional proceedings should become an element of the Polish criminal procedure. This is followed by numerous and widely justified de lege ferenda conclusions.

This paper addresses the problem of classifying the criminal offence of handling stolen goods under the Polish Criminal Code of 1997. Referring to two separate and contradictory views about the crime, the study looks at both of them and attempts to define the subject of legal protection of that criminal offence in the Polish legal system. To this end, the paper also discusses a judgment of 26 June 2014 of the Polish Supreme Court (I KZP 8/14), in which the Supreme Court could not conclusively resolve the issue, creating even more doubts. The author questions the position of the Polish Supreme Court, arguing that it is not supported by either logical or legal arguments which would stem from the long-standing legal tradition. The author further argues that all problems arising from the determination of the good legally protected by the criminal offence as defined in Article 291(1) of the Polish Criminal Code result from the erroneous classification of criminal offences by the Polish lawmaker.

Owing to increasing globalisation, transnational corporations play an important role in international trade. Those wealthy and very complex entities have a major impact on reality and often engage in activities which involve illegal practices such as the environmental pollution, forced labour and other serious infringement of employees’ right or even crimes against humanity. Carrying on business which is primarily profit-oriented may result in violations of fundamental human rights, if this is required for a corporation to financially exploit a business opportunity. It is difficult in practice to hold these entities and their corporate directors to account. Regulations regarding criminal responsibility of managers of transnational corporations can be found in national and international laws. However, criminal proceedings do not give satisfactory results. The main problem lies in powers, flexibility and close links of those corporations with local authorities. The paper points to different solutions applied throughout the world, and describes the best-known criminal proceedings against corporate managers.

The paper makes a distinction between criminal law protection of collective property and that of individual property. It discusses both the amendments of the Polish Criminal Code made on 10 February 2017 and arguments for their introduction. In conclusion, the paper points to some similarities between more severe criminal liability for crimes against collective property under the communist regime and stricter criminal liability for invoice frauds.

The concept of the so-called “continuous offence” has been hotly debated for years, both by legal academics and in doctrinal writings. This paper addresses one of the most controversial grounds for regarding a prohibited act as a continuous offence, i.e. acting with premeditated intent. Basing a key criterion for considering an act a continuous offence on the subjective side of the offence has made it impossible to work out clear-cut criteria for establishing that an offender acted with premeditated intent, even though the concept of continuous offence has been employed for over twenty years now.

This article addresses some amendments of the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure in so far as they affect the position of the injured party. The Act of 19 July 2019 amending the Polish Code of Criminal Code provides for a number of changes relating to that participant of criminal proceedings. The paper deals with the extension of the time limit within which it is possible to withdraw a motion to prosecute, changes to the so-called subsidiary complaint, setting a deadline for questioning the injured under Articles 185a and 185c of the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure or serving the injured party with an order to pay (injunctive judgment) alongside the instructions on how to appeal against the judgment and simultaneously file a statement that the injured will act in the capacity of a subsidiary prosecution counsel. The analysis is aimed to establish whether those changes have led to the strengthening or weakening of the position of the injured party.

This paper analyses the issue of abuse of rights in criminal proceedings. Based on jurisprudence and doctrinal writings about the criminal proceedings, an attempt was made to provide a separate definition of this concept. Then the focus was shifted to seeking a legal basis for sanctioning manifestations of abuse of procedural right, referring to the current legal status, as well as formulating de lege ferenda postulates in this respect.

The paper analyses two provisions of the Act of 10 May 2018 on Personal Data Protection. It describes the structure and characteristic features of acts which obstruct or frustrate an inspection of compliance with personal data protection provisions. The paper emphasises the importance of powers held by a supervisory authority, the President of the Office for Personal Data Protection, especially in the context of the EU legislation. The article also gives examples of interrelationship between the controller and the entity that is controlled and discusses the way this impacts criminal liability. It presents a comparative analysis of the said provision alongside its analogous provision which is related to inspection carried out under Article 55 of the Act of 14 December 2018 on Personal Data Protection in Connection with Preventing and Fighting Crime. The final conclusions include some proposals for, inter alia, the analysis of problems noted by the Personal Data Protection Office while conducting control proceedings in the years 2018–2019.

The article analyses grounds for application of pretrial detention in respect of individuals who have been charged with the criminal offence of participation in an organised criminal group or with participation in an organised criminal association aiming at committing a criminal offence. The paper addresses two presumptions: 1) the presumption of fear that a suspect or the accused shall obstruct criminal proceedings because of their participation in an organised criminal group; 2) the presumption that the suspect or accused shall attempt to obstruct the proper conduct of the proceedings because of the threat that they will be severely punished. The author tries to answer the question whether the presumptions underlying application of pretrial detention at the early stages of criminal proceedings are sufficient for extension of pretrial detention. This is particularly important given the fact that these presumptions operate in schemes which might raise fears that orders of pretrial detention are used as an element of criminal policy against criminal groups. It must be noted that application of pretrial detention enters the sensitive realm of human rights and civil liberties. On the other hand, a failure to apply pretrial detention makes it difficult or even impossible for law enforcement authorities to effectively break up criminal networks and prevent them resurfacing. The fight of law enforcement authorities against organised crime requires application of adequate custodial and non-custodial measures by criminal justice system but is connected with a need to respect personal freedom guaranteed by the Polish Constitution and international treaties.

This paper focuses on the legal nature of proceedings to impose security (precautionary) measures. Given that their legal nature is determined by a set of different features characteristic of given proceedings, the study analyses modifications of proceedings to apply security measures which justify considering them a separate category. It is no doubt that the proceedings in question are criminal proceedings. However, the fact that they differ from the “model” criminal proceedings makes them an interesting subject of study. The findings indicate that the proceedings to impose security measures should be classified as special criminal procedings or more specifically, special proceedings of criminal process and thus it should be viewed as one of the so-called equivalent special proceedings.