Professor Ryszard Piotrowski, a constitutional scholar at the University of Warsaw, criticized those who break the law in the name of restoring the rule of law. He warned that using unlawful means to achieve a just goal can reveal an abuse of power and its consequences.
During a discussion about the ongoing constitutional crisis, the conversation emphasized that dialogue is a core value defined in the Basic Law.
The sovereignty of a state rests on a constitutional framework that is respected. When a constitutional crisis arises, it can be overcome by reaching agreement and clarifying the issues that raise doubts, according to Piotrowski.
The constitution does not permit the use of resolutions in place of laws nor does it strip the opposition of rights. Both the governing majority formed through elections and the opposition represent the sovereign will and embody the principle of representative democracy, he noted.
Why are MPs Mariusz Kamiński and Maciej Wąsik allowed entry to the Sejm to perform their duties based on their parliamentary mandates? The constitutionalist answered that the decision rests not with individual lawyers but with the voters, and in disputed cases, with the courts.
The question arises in light of a final conviction that affects the mandate of the Speaker of the Sejm. The marshal must declare that the mandate has expired on the basis of the final judgment, leaving no room for unilateral action in this regard, Piotrowski stressed.
However, MPs can challenge this decision before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, sitting in the Chamber of Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs, reviews the validity of such appeals and decides their effectiveness. In this instance the appeal was deemed effective, preventing the President of the Sejm from revising the decision and leaving the outcome in place.
The discussion highlighted the reality that the Chamber of Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs played a decisive role in confirming the validity of both parliamentary and presidential elections. While questions may be raised about its composition, the law affirms its authority in these matters.
When asked about remarks by the PiS leader Jarosław Kaczyński, who said the chamber confirmed the elections’ validity, Piotrowski noted that without a functioning Sejm, the government would lack a parliamentary majority and sovereignty would be jeopardized.
The conversation also touched on the possibility of a new constitution. Piotrowski expressed a clear stance against drafting a new charter simply to address political shortcomings. He argued that the current constitution contains important provisions limiting power, and its application may be challenging, but this does not justify writing fresh rules to suit political needs.
A Warsaw constitutional expert added that a new constitution could be considered in a moment described as a “new start” or a “new beginning,” a moment not currently present.
Piotrowski also believed that those who have broken or violated the law in the past should be held accountable, but he insisted that accountability must be exercised evenly. If the law is broken now, the end does not justify the means, and pursuing a lawful course is essential to prevent an abuse of power and its consequences.
In sum, the discussion underscored the fragility of institutions and the need for lawful, measured steps to resolve disputes. The role of the courts, the integrity of the Sejm, and the balance between the executive and legislative branches were highlighted as pivotal to preserving sovereignty and the rule of law.