It is time for judges to apply the law rather than let politics steer decisions. Małgorzata Manowska, the first president of the Supreme Court, stated in an interview with the Catholic weekly Gość Niedzielny that the government’s compromise on the Supreme Court act is unacceptable and unconstitutional because it pressures judicial independence and invites political interference.
READ ALSO:
– The Justice Committee endorsed the bill for the Supreme Court. Szynkowski vel Sęk notes that discussions with the European Commission took place
-Manowska on the compromise: everyone should step back. The same applies to Brussels.
Violent attempts to ignite unrest
In Poland, a troubling pattern has emerged where the law is used as a tool for purposes it should not serve. Some judges openly display this instrumental approach, according to the president of the Supreme Court.
When asked about judges questioning the status of other colleagues, Manowska described the situation as leading to chaos and said that there are violent strains of trying to provoke an uprising.
The president noted that the vast majority of judges act reasonably and conduct themselves with balance, but a minority seeks to undermine peer status under a banner of defending the rule of law.
Obstruction is present
The interlocutor, Bogumiła Łoziński, indicated dissatisfaction with labeling judges as old or new, arguing that colleagues within a shared service should not be pitted against one another.
Have the 30 Supreme Court judges who pledged not to work with the new appointees kept their word?
Manowska admitted obstruction exists. She added that she has received no signals of outright refusals to adjudicate with the new appointees; instead, avoidance is being used.
There is a fear that if the amendment to the Supreme Court Act, negotiated with the European Commission, takes effect, around 3,000 new judges might resign by thinking they are ineffective. That would create problems for the government and Parliament, she warned.
This is why the aim must be for judges to focus on applying the law rather than politics.
Should sovereignty be limited for a mere reward?
The first president of the Supreme Court criticized the proposed changes to the Supreme Court Act, calling them unacceptable and unconstitutional because they would enable judges to challenge the status of their peers.
The bill also suggests creating a once more powerful court to decide whether a judge is properly appointed, which raises questions about legal certainty, the president’s prerogative, and judicial independence.
Manowska stressed the need to uphold sovereignty and warned against measures that would erode it in exchange for a seemingly small gain.
Asked how a resolution with Brussels could be reached, she suggested that EU representatives must be willing to sit at a table and discuss facts rather than react to political narratives influenced by various entities with ties to the region.
Since becoming president, she has traveled across Europe with colleagues, meeting in Strasbourg and Luxembourg, arguing that many misunderstandings could be corrected with a factual dialogue. The aim has been to clear up misperceptions and demonstrate the courtroom’s functioning in practice.
Manowska noted that Poland’s Supreme Court generally functions well compared with its EU counterparts, and she maintains constructive relations with presiding judges from many countries.
— summary in a Sunday guest feature