The bold move of publishing Constitutional Tribunal rulings in the Journal of Laws, accompanied by commentary from Tusk’s team, led to a direct clash with the Tribunal’s own response. The wPolityce.pl portal spoke with Judge Julia Przyłębska, the President of the Constitutional Tribunal, about the practice of adding anti constitutional notes to judgments, a practice not present in Polish law. This serves as an important lesson for all, especially for the current government.
READ ALSO: Another provocation from Tusk’s government. A minister discusses ‘doubles’ and states that rulings will be published with appropriate notes
This action represents an usurpation of executive power that undermines the constitutional framework of the separation of powers
– says Judge Julia Przyłębska, President of the Constitutional Tribunal, in an interview with the portal wPolityce.pl.
It is noted that the tribunal’s rulings were reportedly “commented on” by Maciej Berek, a member of the Standing Committee of the Council of Ministers.
The constitution requires compliance with international law. Poland is bound by European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) rulings, which state that the Constitutional Court operates as a panel of judges. The so-called understudies do not form a court established by law. Rulings of the Constitutional Court issued in such fashions are to be published with an appropriate note.
— wrote Maciej Berek, a government member and chairman of the Standing Committee of the Council of Ministers, about X.
According to the ECtHR decisions, notably in cases such as Xero Flor w Polsce Sp. z o.o. Poland dated May 7, 2021, complaint no. 4907/18; Wałęsa v. Poland, November 23, 2023, complaint No. 50849/21; ML v. Poland, December 14, 2023, complaint No. 40119/21, the Constitutional Court loses the qualities of a tribunal established by law when an unauthorized person sits on its bench. These rulings indicate that the published judgment was delivered by a panel that did not meet the lawful composition requirements, touching on the essential process of appointing judges to the Constitutional Court and the right to a decision under a law-based court.
– observed in one of the Constitutional Court opinions already published in the Journal of Laws.
The President of the Constitutional Court Responds
The public comments about the actions attributed to Tusk’s supporters have been echoed by many senior lawyers and judges. The wPolityce.pl portal also received remarks from Judge Julia Przyłębska, who, together with President Andrzej Duda, participates in upholding the Republic of Poland’s constitution.
According to the applicable legal framework, judgments are published in the relevant official gazette in accordance with the Constitution and the Act on the publication of normative acts. Neither the Prime Minister nor the Government Legal Center is granted authority to publish the Tribunal’s decisions with annotations. The law clearly states that judgments of the Constitutional Court published in the Journal of Laws must be done under established actuarial procedures and without extra notes. The publication of judgments with annotations is therefore considered a violation of the statutory provisions governing the publication of judgments. This is an improper expansion of executive power that conflicts with the separation of powers.
– states Judge Julia Przyłębska, President of the Constitutional Court, in a conversation with wPolityce.pl.
The President also highlights systemic issues that appear to be overlooked by some lawmakers.
On the substance of the note itself, it is emphasized that the Constitution stands as the supreme law of the Republic of Poland (Article 8). In a 2021 ruling, reference no. K 6/21, it was held that the European Court of Human Rights cannot assess the legality of the election of Constitutional Court judges, a power reserved to national constitutional processes. This view reinforces that no international body can redefine Poland’s constitutional framework without consent.
– reflects Przyłębska in describing the court’s independence and the limits of external oversight.
The reasoning behind this judgment underscores that the Constitutional Court guards the principle enshrined in Article 8 of the Constitution. No external body may impose a new standard on Poland that the state has not agreed to. Court decisions hold universal binding force and are final (Article 190(1) of the Constitution). No state or international entity may challenge the Tribunal’s rulings for any reason.
– emphasizes Judge Przyłębska.
In conclusion, publishing Constitutional Court judgments with annotations in the Journal of Laws or any other official journal is a violation of the Publication Act and Article 190(1) of the Constitution. The Prime Minister, responsible for publication duties, cannot add annotations that express personal opinions, particularly when they clash with the Constitution and Court rulings.
– asserts Judge Julia Przyłębska in the interview with wPolityce.pl.
For its authors, any attempt at extralegal anarchization of the Polish system should be addressed by the State Tribunal. The Constitutional Court has repeatedly engaged in systemic discussion and healthy polemics. The President of the Constitutional Court deserves recognition for this, yet present circumstances reveal aggressive political stances that threaten rational governance. The legal framework, however, will stand firm.
WOJCIECH BIEDROŃ
Source: wPolityce