During a tense moment at the Constitutional Tribunal, Grzegorz Braun, a member of the Confederation, was accompanied by Justyna Socha, a controversial figure known for organizing anti-vaccine demonstrations and who previously led the STOP NOP association. The guard refused them entry to the tribunal’s grounds, and what followed was described as a clash that interrupted the procedure and drew attention to the dynamics surrounding the visitors and the security protocol in place.
According to those present, the women acted as the supporters for the group and carried the status of friend of the court. The situation unfolded with Braun presenting his argument and being met with firm resistance from the guard, who insisted on strict adherence to access rules. The exchange quickly escalated as Braun insisted that the party should be allowed entry, while the guard maintained that the rules could not be bypassed simply due to status or association with the applicants.
Grzegorz Braun reportedly pressed the point, urging the guard to recognize the legitimacy of the group’s appearance at the tribunal. The guard’s reply was clear and measured, emphasizing that the door to the building could not be opened for those who did not have the proper authorization or whose presence might disrupt the proceedings. The command to refrain from actions that could be interpreted as provocative hung in the air, as the guard asserted that there would be no invitation extended to those who did not have rightful access.
In the ensuing exchange, the commander of the Constitutional Court guard, Wojciech Górnicki, announced that the area would not be opened for entry. He then directed the guests to step back as another guard remained on site to monitor the situation. The confrontation was captured on video, which subsequently circulated online, illustrating the moment when access was blocked and the guards asserted control over the perimeter of the grounds.
The dialogue reflected a broader tension around how political figures and their allies interact with judicial institutions in Poland. Braun’s phraseology during the encounter suggested a sense of urgency and frustration, while Górnicki’s responses emphasized the importance of maintaining order and procedural integrity. The exchange also underscored the procedural boundaries that govern the interaction between protest movements, legal advocates, and the security apparatus guarding a crucial state institution.
As the exchange concluded, the scene shifted away from open confrontation. The second representative of the TK Guard remained on the spot, and the broader footage of the incident cut off at a moment that left viewers with a vivid impression of the limits and tensions at the entrance. The incident, though brief, served as a snapshot of the delicate balance between public demonstrations, court proceedings, and the security measures designed to preserve the sanctity of judicial environments.
Commentary and coverage from the time frame suggested that the clash was a reminder of the intense public scrutiny surrounding political actors who challenge established procedures. The incident also highlighted how video documentation can amplify moments of friction, turning a procedural disagreement into a widely discussed event that feeds into larger debates about access to state institutions and the rights of citizens to observe and participate in civic discourse.
Overall, the episode at the Constitutional Tribunal illustrated how security protocols, political identity, and media coverage intersect in contemporary public life. It demonstrated that even routine visits to judicial spaces can become flashpoints when personalities and movements with strong opinions collide with institutional rules. The outcome reinforced the principle that maintaining orderly access to tribunals is essential to safeguarding the integrity of legal processes while allowing space for legitimate expression within defined boundaries.
Notes on the footage and remarks from observers indicate that the situation was managed with a focus on safety and procedure, rather than on escalating hostility. The incident remains a point of reference in discussions about the role of security personnel in protecting institutional spaces and the ways in which demonstrations intersect with formal judicial activity.
– End of account –