Former Polish Constitutional Tribunal chief says Sejm resolution is a necessary step
Former President of the Constitutional Tribunal Marek Safjan argues that the Sejm’s draft resolution addressing the consequences of Poland’s constitutional crisis from 2015 to 2023 is essential. He notes it will not magically resolve all issues, but it marks an important move in organizing the country’s constitutional justice framework.
Last night a bill was submitted to the Sejm containing a draft resolution aimed at clarifying the impact of the 2015–2023 crisis on the functioning of the Constitutional Court. According to the agenda, MPs are set to debate it this afternoon.
Safjan told PAP that the resolution is highly necessary and pushed back against views that it is merely symbolic because it carries no legal consequences.
“Organizing reality?”
In his view, the resolution would restore order to a situation created by the Constitutional Court operating in a diminished form with several dual judges. He stressed that it would formally acknowledge that some judges had been selected in ways incompatible with the Constitution and that they are not true judges.
According to Safjan, if the Sejm adopts the resolution, it would gain legal weight by reflecting and implementing court decisions at both national and European levels. He cited the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, the Constitutional Court ruling of December 3, 2015, and case law from the High Administrative Court and the Supreme Court as examples.
Safjan suggested that the next step would involve recognizing that rulings issued with dual judges are fundamentally flawed. He even proposed publishing in Monitor Polski a list of invalid Constitutional Tribunal rulings to reduce legal uncertainty, calling attention to the ongoing impact on citizens who face painful legal ambiguities.
He noted that rulings involving dual judges are invalid from the outset, but declaring this position in the document would carry legal significance and strengthen certainty across the system.
Safjan cited the Constitutional Court’s abortion ruling as an illustration. In that case, individuals involved in criminal proceedings sometimes could not defend themselves effectively because the Public Prosecution Service had challenged the constitutional ruling, illustrating broader issues that would benefit from clarification.
READ ALSO: The plan to repel coordination against the Tribunal; concerns about attempts to replace the court
Another heading reads: The resolution as a message
Safjan believes the proposed resolution sends a signal that constitutes a meaningful step toward organizing Poland’s entire legal framework. The Constitutional Tribunal holds a central role in reviewing the constitutionality of laws, and this resolution signals a commitment to that function.
Of course, he concedes that a resolution has limited, not systematic, one-shot capability. Yet it represents an official announcement that changes are forthcoming. He links these changes to a well-constructed set of criteria for candidates and electoral mechanisms designed to sustain political balance.
He added that candidates should be chosen in a way that avoids pure political entanglement and that individuals with recent public activity should not be favored in elections.
Safjan sees the Sejm resolution as an important signal to the European Union, suggesting that Brussels would observe Poland’s determination to correct the legal path. The move could bolster confidence in Poland’s return to normal constitutional governance, potentially supporting a positive view of EU compliance and the return of certain funds tied to the country’s status within the Union.
Safjan described the idea of “organizing reality” through parliamentary resolutions as evidence of progress toward normality, though he acknowledged that it may not fully reflect a new equilibrium. He noted that further steps are needed and that the plan centers on consolidating a stable, legally grounded future for Poland’s constitutional order.
READ ALSO: Coverage of related parliamentary actions and expert commentary on constitutional changes
The article summarizes discussions about whether the changes can truly stabilize the system or if deeper reforms are still required to ensure enduring legal certainty and enforcement in practice. The conversation continues about how best to align Poland’s constitutional judicial system with European norms and how to restore trust in the Court’s legitimacy.
Source: wPolityce (attribution)