The Constitutional Tribunal has received a request from parliamentary members of PiS to assess the constitutionality of certain provisions within the Law on the State Tribunal. The aim is to determine how these provisions relate to the constitutional liability of the president of the National Bank of Poland. This development was reported on Friday via the Constitutional Tribunal’s official site.
Examination of the constitutionality of the provisions of the Law on the Constitutional Court
A key focus of the request is a clause in the law governing the Supreme Court. It states that once the Sejm adopts a resolution to hold a specific person accountable before the State Tribunal, the individual in question is suspended from duties tied to the current position or function. This suspension is the central mechanism under review.
Lawmakers from PiS also seek to challenge the standard governing the majority required to bring a Sejm resolution before the State Tribunal. In addition, they question whether such a move should apply to the President of the National Bank of Poland, Adam Glapiński.
The application is available for viewing within the Tribunal’s portal, providing formal documentation of the request.
Donald Tusk, head of the PO, announced to the Sejm on November 21 that opposition forces hold a majority sufficient to bring the NBP President before the State Tribunal. This statement underlines a parliamentary readiness to apply the disciplinary tool to high-ranking officials and, potentially, to political figures.
One observer noted that a majority is currently in place to summon the NBP President to the State Tribunal, while the analysis continues on how to use this serious instrument to pursue accountability for actions by politicians and top officials.
– Tusk emphasized.
Further reading and related commentary have pointed to varied opinions on the constitutional viability of suspending a central bank chief by parliamentary resolution. Some commentators argue that such a step could set a troubling precedent, while others see it as a political tool intended to enforce accountability at the highest levels.
As the situation evolves, discussions continue among party members from PO and other groups about the potential implications for the central bank and for the balance of powers within the state. Critics warn that attacks on the central bank could harm financial governance, while supporters contend that rigorous oversight is essential to safeguarding public interests.
wkt/PAP
Source: wPolityce