25 retired judges of the Constitutional Tribunal appeal to PM Morawiecki to withdraw his motion in K 3/21 case

Share

Everything you need to know about the rule of law in Poland

More

'Concerns are increasingly being voiced that our country has reached a critical point in its recent history, and that it is up to the Constitutional Tribunal, among others, to ensure that the path of development chosen in 1989, based on the principle of a democratic state of law and integration with Western Europe, is not interrupted.' - a statement by 25 retired judges of the Constitutional Tribunal



Statement by the retired Judges of the Constitutional Tribunal

 

20 July 2021

 

Read the original statement in Polish

 

For over a dozen years the Constitutional Tribunal, both before and after Poland’s accession to the European Union, has unequivocally and consistently stated that the Constitution of the Republic of Poland has a superior place in the system of sources of law binding in our country. This position was connected with the formulation of the principle of Poland’s support for European integration. The constitutional norm, according to which the Republic of Poland respects the international law binding upon it, has been confirmed and concretised.

 

The finding of the Constitutional Tribunal in the judgment of 15 July this year (P 7/20) that the provisions of the EU Treaties proclaiming the principle of loyal cooperation of Member States and granting the Court of Justice of the European Union competence to order interim measures in cases under consideration are inconsistent with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland means an unjustified departure from the existing line of jurisprudence.

 

Soon, i.e. on 3 August 2021, a hearing in the case K 3/21 is to be held before the full Tribunal. The Constitutional Tribunal will examine from the outset the motion of the Prime Minister to declare unconstitutional the provisions of the European Treaties that create treaty-based grounds for the EU institutions to examine whether the laws of the Member States, including Polish, provide effective protection for subjects of law in the areas covered by EU law. In particular, the independence of the judiciary and the independence of judges are guaranteed.

 

The retired judges of the Constitutional Tribunal are deeply concerned that a judgment upholding the motion in case K 3/21 will be tantamount to questioning the validity of fundamental provisions of EU law in Poland. The judgment is to be handed down at the request of the President of the Council of Ministers, a member of the European Council, the constitutional organ in charge of the government, authorized by the Constitution to conduct the internal and foreign policy of the Republic of Poland.

 

Retired judges of the Constitutional Tribunal state that the supreme role of the Polish Constitution is in no way violated when EU institutions demand respect for the independence of the courts and the independence of judges. These demands do not go beyond what is granted to them in the EU Treaties ratified by the Republic of Poland and whose compatibility with the Constitution has been confirmed by the Constitutional Tribunal. The competence of the EU institutions does not relate to the judicial system, but to the qualities that national judges must have in order to be able to adjudicate in European cases. Respect for judicial independence and independence of judges is also required by the Polish Constitution (Article 4, Article 45, Article 78, Article 173, Article 178).

 

Therefore, retired judges of the Constitutional Tribunal appeal to the President of the Council of Ministers to withdraw their motion, which is possible until the hearing begins.

 

Concerns are increasingly being voiced that our country has reached a critical point in its recent history, and that it is up to the Constitutional Tribunal, among others, to ensure that the path of development chosen in 1989, based on the principle of a democratic state of law and integration with Western Europe, is not interrupted.

 

Our taking the floor stems from our fidelity to the constitutional oath we took upon appointment to the judiciary and from our conviction that the Polish raison d’état requires that we do not remain silent today.

 

Stanisław Biernat
Teresa Dębowska-Romanowska
Kazimierz Działocha
Lech Garlicki
Mirosław Granat
Wojciech Hermeliński
Adam Jamróz
Stefan Jaworski
Biruta Lewaszkiewicz-Petrykowska
Wojciech Łączkowski
Ewa Łętowska
Marek Mazurkiewicz
Andrzej Mączyński
Janusz Niemcewicz
Małgorzata Pyziak-Szafnicka
Stanisław Rymar
Ferdynand Rymarz
Andrzej Rzepliński
Jerzy Stępień
Piotr Tuleja
Sławomira Wronkowska-Jaśkiewicz
Mirosław Wyrzykowski
Bohdan Zdziennicki
Andrzej Zoll
Marek Zubik



Author


Everything you need to know about the rule of law in Poland


More

Published

July 21, 2021

Tags

Supreme CourtDisciplinary Chamberdisciplinary proceedingsPolandrule of lawConstitutional Tribunaljudicial independenceZbigniew ZiobroEuropean CommissionCourt of Justice of the EUjudgesNational Council of the JudiciaryCourt of JusticeEuropean UnionAndrzej DudaIgor TuleyaMałgorzata Manowskadisciplinary systemMinister of JusticeCommissioner for Human RightsEuropean Court of Human RightsMateusz MorawieckiCJEUpresidential electionsjudiciaryAdam Bodnarpreliminary rulingsdemocracymuzzle lawHungaryJarosław Kaczyńskielections 2020Beata MorawiecFirst President of the Supreme CourtprosecutorsKamil Zaradkiewiczdisciplinary commissionerEuropean Arrest WarrantCOVID-19PresidentProsecutor GeneralConstitutionfreedom of expressioncriminal lawMarek SafjanOSCEWaldemar ŻurekPaweł JuszczyszynNational Public ProsecutorPiotr SchabPrzemysław Radzikcriminal proceedingsPrime MinisterJulia PrzyłębskaExtraordinary Control and Public Affairs Chambermedia freedomSupreme Administrative Courtconditionality mechanismconditionalityEU budgetCriminal ChamberLaw and JusticeprosecutionNCJNational ProsecutorelectionsWojciech HermelińskiStanisław PiotrowiczAndrzej ZollMałgorzata Gersdorfacting first president of the Supreme CourtAleksander StepkowskiOrdo IurisMay 10 2020 electionsmedia independenceAmsterdam District CourtKrzysztof ParchimowiczMaciej NawackiEAWmediaimmunityAnna DalkowskaCouncil of Europe2017freedom of assemblyFreedom HouseLech GarlickiStanisław BiernatArticle 7Venice CommissionWłodzimierz WróbelPM Mateusz MorawieckiAndrzej StępkaK 3/21P 7/20Ministry of JusticeC-791/19disciplinary liability for judgesNational Electoral CommissionGeneral Assembly of the Supreme Court JudgesPresident of PolandPresident of the Republic of PolandJarosław GowinLGBTLGBT ideology free zonesSejmBroda and Bojara v PolandMichał LasotaZuzanna Rudzińska-BluszczSylwia Gregorczyk-AbramdefamationTHEMISTVPLex Super OmniaAdam TomczyńskiBelgiumNetherlandsBogdan Święczkowskidemocratic backslidingViktor OrbanOLAFdecommunizationNext Generation EUvetopoliceJózef IwulskiLaw on the NCJJustice Defence Committee – KOSrecommendationTeresa Dębowska-RomanowskaKazimierz DziałochaMirosław GranatAdam JamrózStefan JaworskiBiruta Lewaszkiewicz-PetrykowskaWojciech ŁączkowskiEwa ŁętowskaHuman Rights CommissionerMarek MazurkiewiczCCBEAndrzej MączyńskiThe Council of Bars and Law Societies of EuropeJanusz NiemcewiczMałgorzata Pyziak- SzafnickaStanisław Rymarpublic opinion pollFerdynand RymarzAndrzej RzeplińskiSupreme Court PresidentJerzy StępieńPiotr TulejaSławomira Wronkowska-JaśkiewiczMirosław WyrzykowskireportBohdan ZdziennickiMarek ZubikDidier ReyndersEuropean ParliamentZiobroMichał LaskowskiMarek PietruszyńskiPiotr Gąciarekhuman rightscorruptionEuropean Association of Judges11 January March in WarsawCourt of Justice of the European UnionJustice FundAdam SynakiewiczcoronavirusPiSresolution of 23 January 2020Piotr PszczółkowskiJarosław WyrembakLeon KieresPKWinfringment actionEU valuesENCJlex NGOcivil societyRussiaIsraelforeign agents lawOrganization of Security and Co-operation in EuropeFirst President of the Suprme CourtLGBT free zonesequalityChamber of Extraordinary Verificationhate crimeshate speechcriminal codeGrzęda v PolandXero Flor w Polsce Sp. z o.o. v. PolandŻurek v PolandSobczyńska and Others v PolandReczkowicz and Others v. PolandRafał Trzaskowskimedia lawIustitiaKrystian MarkiewiczPrzemysła RadzikSenateMarcin WarchołElżbieta KarskaMarcin RomanowskiJacek CzaputowiczPrzemysław Czarneklegislative practiceENAZbigniew BoniekcourtsOmbudsmanKraśnikNorwayNorwegian fundsNorwegian Ministry of Foreign AffairsMichał WawrykiewiczFree CourtsC-487/19Article 6 ECHRArticle 10 ECHRRegional Court in AmsterdamOpenbaar MinisterieUrsula von der LeyenEwa WrzosekAK judgmentSimpson judgmentEU law primacyForum Współpracy Sędziówpublic broadcastermutual trustLMIrelandIrena MajcherAmsterdamthe Regional Court in WarsawUnited Nationsjudcial independenceLeszek MazurMaciej Miterapopulisminterim measuresautocratizationMultiannual Financial Frameworkabortion rulingequal treatmentabortionprotestsfundamental rightsthe NetherlandsDenmarkSwedenFinlandMariusz KrasońCT PresidentGermanyCelmerC354/20 PPUC412/20 PPUAusl 301 AR 104/19Karlsruheact on misdemeanoursCivil Service ActParliamentary Assembly of the Council of EuropeEUWhite Paperlustrationtransitional justice2018Nations in TransitCouncil of the EUmedia taxStanisław Zabłockiadvertising taxmediabezwyboruJacek KurskiKESMAIndex.huTelex.huJelenJózsef SzájerKlubrádióSLAPPLIBE CommitteeStrategic Lawsuits Against Public ParticipationFrans TimmermansGazeta WyborczaOKO.pressUS Department of StatePollitykaBrussels IRome IISwieczkowskiArticle 2Forum shoppingadvocate generalDariusz ZawistowskitransparencyEuropean Economic and Social Committeepress releaseSebastian KaletaRights and Values ProgrammeC-156/21C-157/21C-619/18Marek Piertuszyńskidefamatory statementsWorld Justice Project awardNational Prosecutor’s Officeintimidation of dissentersWojciech SadurskiBogdan ŚwiączkowskiDisicplinary ChamberjudgeTribunal of StatetransferPechOlsztyn courtKochenovPrzemysła CzarnekEvgeni TanchevEducation MinisterFreedom in the WorldKrystyna PawłowiczECJIpsosFrackowiakOlimpia Barańska-Małuszeretirement ageMariusz MuszyńskiAmnesty InternationalHudocŁukasz PiebiakRegional Court in KrakówPiebiak gateKonrad SzymańskiPiotr Bogdanowicztrans-Atlantic valuesPiotr BurasLSOauthoritarian equilibriumlawyersArticle 258Act of 20 December 2019clientelismoligarchic systemRecovery FundEuropean Public Prosecutor's Officerepressive actPolish National FoundationLux VeritatisKoen LenaertsMałgorzata BednarekPiotr WawrzykPaweł FilipekMaciej TaborowskiharrassmentMarian BanaśAlina CzubieniakSupreme Audit OfficeTVNjournalistslexTVNGerard BirgfellerBelarusEwa MaciejewskaPolish mediastate of emergencypostal votepostal vote bill