SURVEY ON DISSENTING OPINIONS IN THE JURISPRUDENCE OF COLLEGIAL PUBLIC FINANCE BODIES IN POLAND
SURVEY ON DISSENTING OPINIONS IN THE JURISPRUDENCE OF COLLEGIAL PUBLIC FINANCE BODIES IN POLAND

Summary/Abstract: Dissenting opinions to the rulings of state bodies are submitted very rarely. The purpose of this article was to identify the reasons for this phenomenon in case of rulings of collegial public finance bodies, such as committees adjudicating on cases of violation of public finance discipline (including joint adjudication committee, inter-ministerial adjudication committee, adjudication committee at the Chief of Staff of the Prime Minister Chancellery, regional adjudication committees at regional accounting chambers, the Main Adjudication Committee) and rulings of local government appeal boards adjudicating on tax matters. The research was conducted using the Computer-Assisted Web Interview research technique. The research material included 67 questionnaires completed by a group of employees-adjudicators of the above-mentioned bodies. Their analysis led to the following research findings which explained why dissenting opinions to the decisions of collegial public finance authorities are submitted so seldom: rare occurrence of controversies among the members of the adjudicating panel, personality traits of the members of these bodies, and more specifically, striving to ensure their independence and a sense of collegiality. The shape of the procedural provisions governing the rules for submitting dissenting opinions cannot be seen as one of such reasons.

• Details
• Contents