Commissioner for Human Rights: Impossible elections

Share

Leading journalist and commentator on legal affairs in Poland, a columnist for Polityka weekly. Her latest book ‘Sędziowie mówią. Zamach…

More

Voting entirely by post can breach the constitutional principle of the universality of the elections. The campaign being conducted does not respect the principle of equal opportunities for the candidates, while the citizens are not receiving even a minimal amount of knowledge about the elections. Held in this way, they cannot be consistent with international standards.



Commissioner for Human Rights dr hab. Adam Bodnar’s opinion on the Law and Justice (Prawo i Sprawiedliwość, PiS) presidential elections planned during the period of the pandemic has just arrived in the Senate.

We are in a state of emergency

 

The Commissioner for Human Rights notes that the criteria provided for by the constitution for introducing a state of emergency, in this case, a state of natural disaster, have been satisfied.

 

Meanwhile, the authorities are not introducing it directly, but through legal acts, to which they are giving different names – e.g. “on specific solutions related to preventing, controlling and combating Covid-19, other infectious diseases and the crisis situations caused by them” or “on the special principles of holding elections for the office of President of the Republic of Poland ordered in 2020.”

 

“It should be categorically emphasised that it [the state of emergency] is in force in reality. Therefore, in this situation (…) the prohibition arising from Article 228, para. 6 of the constitution that, among others, the Act on the election of the President of the Republic of Poland cannot be amended during a state of emergency is applicable,” states the ombudsman.

 

Breached constitution

 

Adam Bodnar is of the opinion that legislative work on the Act on the 2020 presidential elections is being conducted in breach of the constitution. He assesses that the new rules “cannot fully enable citizens to exercise their right to vote.”

 

The Ombudsman also gave his opinion to the National Electoral Commission, which, according to the law, monitors that elections are conducted correctly and that the rights of the voters arising from the constitution are respected.

 

Read the full opinion in Polish

 

Translated by Roman Wojtasz

 

First published in Polish at Polityka, April 22, 2020.



Author


Leading journalist and commentator on legal affairs in Poland, a columnist for Polityka weekly. Her latest book ‘Sędziowie mówią. Zamach…


More

Published

April 26, 2020

Tags

Supreme Courtrule of lawdisciplinary proceedingsjudicial independenceEuropean CommissionDisciplinary ChamberNational Council of the JudiciaryjudgesCourt of JusticePolandAndrzej DudaConstitutional TribunalZbigniew ZiobroCourt of Justice of the EUpresidential electionsjudiciaryelections 2020European Unionpreliminary rulingsdemocracyMinister of JusticeJarosław Kaczyńskidisciplinary systemFirst President of the Supreme CourtCJEUCommissioner for Human Rightsmuzzle lawIgor TuleyaCOVID-19OSCEdisciplinary commissionerPresidentAdam BodnarProsecutor Generalprosecutorsfreedom of expressionLaw and Justiceelectionsacting first president of the Supreme CourtMay 10 2020 elections2017Freedom HouseExtraordinary Control and Public Affairs ChamberVenice CommissionConstitutionprosecutionNCJcriminal lawdisciplinary liability for judgesNational Electoral CommissionMarek SafjanKamil ZaradkiewiczGeneral Assembly of the Supreme Court JudgesAleksander StepkowskiEuropean Court of Human RightsPresident of PolandMałgorzata ManowskaJarosław GowinSejmWaldemar Żurekdemocratic backslidingdecommunizationMateusz MorawieckiPrime Ministerfreedom of assemblyJulia PrzyłębskaLaw on the NCJrecommendationHuman Rights CommissionerCCBEThe Council of Bars and Law Societies of EuropereportZiobroPM Mateusz MorawieckiEuropean Association of Judges11 January March in WarsawHungaryNational ProsecutorcoronavirusC-791/19Wojciech Hermelińskiresolution of 23 January 2020Stanisław PiotrowiczPiotr PszczółkowskiJarosław WyrembakLeon KieresAndrzej ZollPKWMałgorzata Gersdorfinfringment actionEU valuesENCJlex NGOcivil societyRussiaIsraelforeign agents lawOrdo IurisOrganization of Security and Co-operation in EuropeFirst President of the Suprme CourtPresident of the Republic of PolandLGBTLGBT free zonesequalityLGBT ideology free zonesChamber of Extraordinary Verificationhate crimeshate speechcriminal codeGrzęda v PolandXero Flor w Polsce Sp. z o.o. v. PolandBroda and Bojara v PolandŻurek v PolandSobczyńska and Others v PolandReczkowicz and Others v. PolandRafał Trzaskowskimedia independencemedia lawIustitiaKrystian MarkiewiczPrzemysła RadzikMichał LasotaSenateZuzanna Rudzińska-BluszczSylwia Gregorczyk-AbramMarcin WarchołElżbieta KarskaMarcin RomanowskiJacek CzaputowiczPrzemysław Czarneklegislative practiceEuropean Arrest WarrantENAAmsterdam District CourtZbigniew BoniekdefamationcourtsKrzysztof Parchimowiczpopulismequal treatmentfundamental rightspoliceCT PresidentJustice Defence Committee – KOSEUWhite Paperlustrationtransitional justicepublic opinion pollSupreme Court President2018Nations in TransitCouncil of the EUStanisław ZabłockiArticle 7European ParliamentLIBE CommitteeFrans TimmermansUS Department of StateSwieczkowskiSupreme Administrative Courtadvocate generalpress releaseRights and Values ProgrammeconditionalityEU budgetC-619/18defamatory statementsWorld Justice Project awardintimidation of dissentersWojciech SadurskijudgetransferPechKochenovEvgeni TanchevFreedom in the WorldECJFrackowiakretirement ageAmnesty InternationalŁukasz PiebiakPiebiak gatehuman rightstrans-Atlantic valuesLSOlawyersAct of 20 December 2019repressive actKoen LenaertsharrassmentAlina CzubieniakMinistry of JusticeJustice FundGerard BirgfellerEwa Maciejewskapostal votepostal vote billPiS