““Gazeta Wyborcza” on its online pages tells readers that the Supreme Court has allegedly “undermined the power of the Przyłębska Tribunal rulings.” The editors of Czerska translated the ruling of the expanded panel of the Criminal Chamber to their readers and informed their readers that this means that “rulings pronounced with the participation of double parties do not have universally binding force and are not final.” Kamila Gasiuk-Pihowicz also posted her “translation” on Twitter/X. The former justice minister and a Supreme Court judge responded to the revelations.
Constitutional Tribunal and provisions of the Constitution
The expanded panel of the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court stated in a decision dated December 13, 2023 that if the judgments of the Constitutional Court were pronounced with the participation of “doubles”, they would not have universally binding force and would not be final.
The body composed of persons appointed to previously filled seats is not the body described in the Constitution as the Constitutional Court
– wrote “Gazeta Wyborcza”, citing the Supreme Court’s justification and adding that Article 190 of the Constitution, which states that decisions of the Constitutional Court are final and have universally binding force, “is not in force”.
The decision was made by a seven-member panel of the Criminal Chamber, chaired by former President Michał Laskowski and with Judge Tomasz Artymiuk as rapporteur. The case was initiated by Ombudsman Marcin Wiącek, who asked the Supreme Court about the legal consequences of the Constitutional Court’s December 2022 ruling.
– Added “GW”.
Gasiuk-Pihowicz on the “landmark ruling”
Kamila Gasiuk-Pihowicz could not ignore the case. The KO lawmaker, who is also a member of the National Council for the Judiciary, said in a post on Twitter/X that the Supreme Court had made a “groundbreaking ruling.”
This is a landmark Supreme Court ruling! Judgments pronounced with the participation of bipartisan parties in the Constitutional Tribunal do not have universally binding force and are not final – according to the expanded panel of the Criminal Chamber. There’s nothing to discuss here. A sentence with an understudy is not a sentence
– said Kamila Gasiuk-Pihowicz.
Kaleta and Zaradkiewicz respond
Former Justice Minister Sebastian Kaleta and Supreme Court Judge Kamil Zaradkiewicz reacted to the MP’s entry from the Tusk-led coalition.
Sebastian Kaleta emphasized that “there is no provision in the Constitution regarding the power of the Supreme Court to review the Constitutional Court.”
Judges of the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court have been playing legislators and system makers since 2015. They invalidate the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Common Courts Act or the Register of National Courts. They’re doing it again with the Constitution. First in the case of the presidential pardon, now in the case of the Constitutional Court. It’s pure anarchy
– pointed out the Member of Parliament of Sovereign Poland.
I would like to remind you that the Constitution does not contain any provision regarding the power of the Supreme Court to review the Constitutional Court. However, there are even reports that the Constitutional Court could do this before the Supreme Court. Both art. 189 (judgment of the Constitutional Court on the 2021 legislative resolution of the three chambers of the Supreme Court) and art. 190, which expressly prohibits questioning the rulings of the Constitutional Court
– emphasized the former Deputy Minister of Justice.
Supreme Court Judge Kamil Zaradkiewicz also commented on the case, stating that Gasiuk-Pihowicz misled the Poles.
I feel a little ashamed that such obvious issues have to be explained to a member of the National Council for the Judiciary. Please do not mislead the public – this is merely the jury’s opinion, which has no legal forceand furthermore, it goes beyond the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which has no jurisdiction to assess the correctness of the composition of constitutional bodies (Article 7 of the Constitution – this is called ‘legalism’).
– emphasized Judge Zaradkiewicz, adding that this is “knowledge at the level of ‘introduction to jurisprudence’ (first year of law school).”
By the way: the Supreme Court that judges the compositions of the Constitutional Tribunal, which ruled on the unconstitutionality of the action of this particular Supreme Court (with the participation of these judges), in fact judges “in its own case”. And it applies its own resolutions, which have been recognized as unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court, ruling that, contrary to the judgment of the Constitutional Court, it could have issued these resolutions.
– Judge Kamil Zaradkiewicz added.
READ ALSO:
– OUR SUBJECT. Apolitical judges respond to Robert Biedroń’s threats against the President of the Constitutional Court: “Unacceptable”
– OUR INTERVIEW. Prof. Łabno: The president has not violated the constitution. Where is this promise of independence in public media?
— The President of the Constitutional Court, Julia Przyłębska, reminded KO MPs of the provisions of the Constitution. “It has nothing to do with the goodwill of anyone.”
wkt/wyborcza.pl/Twitter/x
Source: wPolityce