Several politicians from the ruling party have described the proposed reforms to the Constitutional Tribunal as a dangerous legislative creation that should be dismissed entirely during the second reading. One member, Krzysztof Szczucki, labeled the reform package a legislative monster and urged the deputies to reject it outright, even after noting that more than forty amendments had been added to the bills.
He pointed out that while a questionable plan to start disciplinary actions against judges by the Attorney General had been abandoned, the broader package still stands as a dangerous project that deserves to be sent to the legislative dustbin.
“Why do you want to destroy TK?”
The question was posed to the government: Why press to undermine the Constitutional Court? Is there frustration when judges uphold the Constitution or strike down laws that were passed without full voting rights from all lawmakers? This line of inquiry was aimed at challenging the government’s motives and procedures.
The remark stressed that there are boundaries that should not be crossed. It warned that crossing those lines could set a precedent where any outcome might be pursued through political action rather than adherence to established norms and legal limits.
The parliamentary group Law and Justice called for the second reading to be rejected in its entirety. The request covered both the bill on the Constitutional Court and the accompanying laws designed to implement and align the reform with the court’s mandate.
Reform of the Constitutional Court
The initial drafts for overhauling the Constitutional Tribunal were submitted to the Sejm in early March, authored by members of the governing coalition. The first reading of the draft law creating the new framework for the Constitutional Tribunal and the implementing provisions followed in late April. These moves were presented alongside a broader package that included a constitutional amendment and a resolution already adopted by the Sejm, portraying a comprehensive reform plan tied to the leadership’s strategy for the judiciary.
Recently, the Parliamentary Committee on Justice and Human Rights concluded its work on both texts, introducing numerous amendments. Most changes were editorial or related to legislative drafting, but some reflected proposals from the Legislative Bureau designed to shape the regulations with precision and clarity.
Further coverage noted ongoing debates about the direction of judicial reforms and the impact on constitutional oversight. The discussions emphasized the tension between legislative ambition and constitutional safeguards, urging stakeholders to consider long-term consequences for governance and the balance of powers.
More about the second reading of the reform packages was expected as lawmakers weighed public interest, legal standards, and the constitutional guarantees that protect individual rights and the integrity of judicial review.