Donald Tusk Gives Green Light for Selection of Neo-Judge as Chair of the Civil Chamber Assembly of the Supreme Court

Share

Co-founder of the Rule of Law in Poland and the Wiktor Osiatyński Archive, rule of law monitoring projects. Doctor of…

More

Donald Tusk has countersigned President Duda's decree appointing a neo-judge as the chairperson of the Assembly of Judges of the Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court, which is tasked with electing a new Chief Justice of the Chamber. “Supreme Court judges are devastated and stunned. They feel betrayed,” comments Krystian Markiewicz, President of Iustitia.



On Tuesday, August 27, the Polish Monitor (Monitor Polski) published a decree by President Andrzej Duda regarding the appointment of the chairperson of the Assembly of Judges of the Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court. The neo-judge Krzysztof Andrzej Wesołowski, appointed by the President, will lead the assembly that will select candidates for the position of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, overseeing the Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court.

 

The decree bore the countersignature of Prime Minister Donald Tusk. The judicial circles opposing the judicial reforms implemented by the Law and Justice Party (PiS) reacted with outrage to the Prime Minister’s decision.

 

What is the issue?

 

At the end of September 2024, the three-year term of the current Chief Justice of the Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court, neo-judge Joanna Misztal-Konecka, will expire. The regulations introduced by the PiS government are designed to ensure that among the three candidates the assembly of judges must present to the President, there is always at least one neo-judge.

 

As reported by Mariusz Jałoszewski in mid-August, there have been several attempts to select candidates for the new Chief Justice, but all assemblies have ended in failure. Legal judges are boycotting the elections, unwilling to vote alongside neo-judges, especially given that the President is expected to choose a neo-judge anyway.

 

The list of candidates for the new Chief Justice includes only neo-judges – Marcin Łochowski, Marcin Krajewski, and Joanna Misztal-Konecka. As Misztal-Konecka is running for a second term, she cannot lead the electoral assembly as the current Chief Justice because she is a candidate herself. Consequently, the President must appoint the chairperson of the electoral assembly, as stipulated by the Supreme Court Act.

 

However, for the President’s appointment of the chairperson to be valid, it required the Prime Minister’s countersignature. President Andrzej Duda’s decree dates from August 17, and it was published in the Monitor Polski with Donald Tusk’s signature on August 27.

 

What if there had been no countersignature?

 

If the Prime Minister had not provided the countersignature, the President would not have been able to appoint the chairperson of the assembly. In such a case, as Joanna Misztal-Konecka’s term would end in September, the duties of Chief Justice would be assumed by the most senior judge heading one of the civil chamber’s departments (also a neo-judge). However, this person would only serve as acting Chief Justice until an assembly could be convened to elect three candidates. This scenario presumed that such an election might occur following a change in the presidency in 2025. In contrast, the Prime Minister’s countersignature paves the way for the election of a neo-judge as Chief Justice for the next three years immediately.

 

Donald Tusk’s decision to countersign the President’s decree regarding the Supreme Court coincides with the selection of a candidate for the European Commissioner. On August 13, the Prime Minister publicly announced that the government’s proposal would be the candidacy of Piotr Serafin, Acting Permanent Representative of Poland in Brussels. According to the PiS-enacted so-called competency law, the Prime Minister needs the President’s signature for such a proposal. The President’s Office announced on August 16 that Andrzej Duda had agreed to Piotr Serafin’s candidacy. A few days later, Onet reported a confidential meeting between the Prime Minister and the President.

Judges’ Outrage

“The situation is a complete surprise. An extremely negative surprise. Firstly, on October 15, the Coalition Prime Minister appoints a neo-judge to any position together with the President. Secondly, this decision paves the way for the re-election of a neo-judge as Chief Justice of the Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court. Instead of working towards resolving the massive problem with the Supreme Court, Donald Tusk is temporarily cementing PiS’s judicial pathology in the Supreme Court with this countersignature,” said Krystian Markiewicz, President of Iustitia, in an interview with OKO.press.

 

“Judges of the Civil Chamber have effectively blocked the election of the Chief Justice in recent months. They assumed, as a certainty, that the Prime Minister of a government that talks about restoring the rule of law would not agree to such a joint initiative with President Duda. No one even warned them, no one consulted with them. The Supreme Court judges are devastated, stunned. They feel betrayed. I hope this is only a mistake and not deliberate policy. I hope that talks between the government and the judges will commence soon.”

 

Supreme Court Judge, Prof. Włodzimierz Wróbel from the Criminal Chamber, also commented on the matter via social media:

 

“At first, I was convinced this was too improbable to be possible. Yet, it is happening. When politicians took control of the Supreme Court, the President appointed a commissioner from among the neo-judges to conduct the vote for Prof. M. Manowska, whom he intended for the position of First President of the Supreme Court. For the validity of President Duda’s decision, the agreement of Prime Minister M. Morawiecki was required. Of course, there was no issue with this agreement.

 

But for the current Prime Minister to endorse the same maneuver with his signature, allowing political nominees of the previous government to retain control over one of the most important parts of the Supreme Court?

 

The President appointed a commissioner to conduct the election of the Chief Justice of the Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court, an illegally appointed neo-judge. Without the Prime Minister’s agreement and signature, such an appointment would be invalid, and President Duda could not appoint another political nominee as Chief Justice of this Chamber for the next three years.

 

But the Prime Minister agreed, allowing unconstitutional actions by the President. Restoring the rule of law.”

 

What about the Labor Chamber?

 

Judicial circles are also wondering what will happen to the Labor and Social Security Chamber of the Supreme Court. It is the last chamber of the Supreme Court where the Chief Justice is not a neo-judge. However, the term of its current Chief Justice, Judge Piotr Prusinowski, ends on September 2.

 

The candidate for the new Chief Justice of the Labor Chamber, like in the other chambers, should be designated by the Assembly of Judges of the Chamber. However, it has not been convened because the legal judges, who still have the majority in the Chamber, have declared they will not deliberate until there are changes restoring the rule of law in the Supreme Court.

 

If there is no Chief Justice in the Chamber on September 3, the law stipulates that the position will be taken over by the oldest department head of the Chamber, i.e., legal judge Dawid Miąsik. However, in this case, the President could also pave the way for the appointment of a new Chief Justice. The law amended by the PiS allows the President to appoint a temporary Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to conduct the elections for a new Chief Justice of the Chamber. But, as with the previous case, this would require the Prime Minister’s countersignature. So far, there is no information about an agreement between the Prime Minister and the President.

 

 

This article by Dominika Sitnicka appeared in OKO.press on August 27, 2024.

https://oko.press/donald-tusk-dal-zielone-swiatlo-dla-wyboru-neo-sedziego-na-prezesa-izby-cywilnej-sn



Author


Co-founder of the Rule of Law in Poland and the Wiktor Osiatyński Archive, rule of law monitoring projects. Doctor of…


More

Published

August 28, 2024

Tags

Supreme CourtPolandConstitutional TribunalDisciplinary Chamberjudgesrule of lawdisciplinary proceedingsZbigniew ZiobroNational Council of the JudiciaryCourt of Justice of the EUjudicial independenceEuropean CommissionEuropean UnionAndrzej DudaMałgorzata ManowskaCourt of JusticeMinister of JusticeEuropean Court of Human RightsAdam BodnarIgor Tuleyadisciplinary systemmuzzle lawJarosław KaczyńskiNational Recovery PlanCJEUMateusz Morawieckineo-judgesCommissioner for Human RightsCourt of Justice of the European UnionPrzemysław RadzikWaldemar ŻurekdemocracyNational Council for JudiciaryPiotr Schabelectionspresidential electionsKamil ZaradkiewiczJulia Przyłębskamedia freedomcriminal lawelections 2023disciplinary commissionerharassmentprosecutionSupreme Administrative CourtHungaryelections 2020preliminary rulingsjudiciaryDagmara Pawełczyk-WoickaK 3/21First President of the Supreme CourtPaweł JuszczyszynNational ProsecutorRecovery FundPresidentMichał LasotaProsecutor GeneralŁukasz PiebiakBeata MorawiecprosecutorsEuropean Arrest Warrantfreedom of expressionConstitutionPrime MinisterSejmimmunityMaciej NawackiIustitiaRegional Court in KrakówCriminal ChamberCOVID-19Maciej FerekOSCEMałgorzata GersdorfcourtsVenice CommissionMarek SafjanMinistry of JusticeExtraordinary Control and Public Affairs ChamberEU budgetdisciplinary liability for judgesWojciech HermelińskiPiSNCJKrystian MarkiewiczStanisław PiotrowiczPresident of the Republic of PolandAleksander Stepkowskicommission on Russian influenceJustice FundTHEMISLabour and Social Security ChamberLaw and JusticeNational Public ProsecutorCouncil of Europecriminal proceedingsconditionalitycorruptionStanisław BiernatreformsAnna Dalkowskafreedom of assemblyconditionality mechanismWłodzimierz WróbelsuspensionPiotr GąciarekOrdo IurisReczkowicz and Others v. PolandparliamentMarcin RomanowskiAndrzej Stępkamedia independenceChamber of Professional LiabilityBroda and Bojara v PolandXero Flor w Polsce Sp. z o.o. v. PolandP 7/20K 7/21LGBTPresident of PolandNational Reconstruction PlanJarosław DudziczLex DudaProfessional Liability ChamberMay 10 2020 electionsStrategic Lawsuits Against Public ParticipationPiotr PrusinowskidefamationLex Super OmniamediaUrsula von der LeyenKrzysztof ParchimowiczEAWabortionMichał Wawrykiewiczelectoral codeAmsterdam District CourtNext Generation EUSLAPPConstitutional Tribunal PresidentDidier ReyndersTVPEwa ŁętowskaSenateParliamentary Assembly of the Council of EuropeLech GarlickiSylwia Gregorczyk-AbramArticle 6 ECHRAndrzej ZollNational Electoral CommissionFreedom HouseJarosław WyrembakJustice Defence Committee – KOSreformArticle 7acting first president of the Supreme CourtSupreme Court President2017PM Mateusz MorawieckipolicePiotr TulejaJerzy StępieńAndrzej RzeplińskiFerdynand RymarzStanisław RymarMałgorzata Pyziak- SzafnickaDariusz ZawistowskiOKO.pressreportSławomira Wronkowska-JaśkiewiczMirosław WyrzykowskiMarek ZubikDariusz KornelukMarzanna Piekarska-DrążekEuropean Parliamentmilestoneselectoral processAndrzej MączyńskiJózef IwulskiWojciech MaczugavetoOLAFViktor OrbanSzymon Szynkowski vel SękMaciej Miterajudcial independencecourt presidentsJanusz NiemcewiczTeresa Dębowska-RomanowskaMarek MazurkiewiczZiobroMirosław GranatWojciech ŁączkowskiBiruta Lewaszkiewicz-PetrykowskaStefan JaworskiAdam JamrózKazimierz Działochainsulting religious feelingsrestoration of the rule of lawright to fair trialXero Flor v. PolandLaw on the NCJKrakówstate of emergencydecommunizationBelarusAdam SynakiewiczAstradsson v IcelandK 6/21Joanna Hetnarowicz-SikoraCentral Anti-Corruption BureausurveillanceMariusz KamińskiPegasusEdyta BarańskaJoanna Misztal-KoneckaCivil ChamberUkraineSupreme Audit OfficeMarian BanaśKrystyna PawłowiczCCBERafał PuchalskiThe Council of Bars and Law Societies of EuropeMarek PietruszyńskiMichał Laskowskipublic opinion pollsmear campaignMariusz MuszyńskiHuman Rights CommissionerMaciej TaborowskiPaweł FilipekInternational Criminal CourtKonrad WytrykowskirecommendationaccountabilityJakub IwaniecDariusz DrajewicztransparencyFree CourtsBohdan Zdziennickiretirement ageSLAPPsPATFoxLGBT ideology free zoneslexTuskAdam Tomczyński11 January March in Warsawabuse of state resourcesEuropean Association of Judgespublic mediaEwa Wrzosekcourt changesC-791/19democratic backslidingcoronavirushuman rightscriminal codePiebiak gateelections fairnessZuzanna Rudzińska-BluszczJarosław GowinEU law primacyPiotr PszczółkowskiBelgiumtransferNetherlandscivil societyRussiaBogdan Święczkowskielections integrityintimidation of dissentersMarcin Warchołlex NGOGeneral Assembly of the Supreme Court JudgesAgnieszka Brygidyr-DoroszCrimes of espionageNCBiRJoanna KnobelKasta/AntykastaThe National Centre for Research and DevelopmentHater ScandalPaweł StyrnaGrzegorz FurmankiewiczDariusz BarskiJoanna Kołodziej-MichałowiczJustyna WydrzyńskaKrystyna Morawa-FryźlewiczEwa ŁąpińskaIrena BochniakZbigniew ŁupinaNational Broadcasting CouncilKatarzyna ChmuraStanisław ZdunLasotaAntykastaEuropean Anti-Fraud Office OLAFMarek JaskulskiRome StatuteCourt of Appeal in Warsawlex RaczkowskiCourt of Appeal in KrakówNational Council for the JudiciaryMarek Astgag lawsuitsAssessment ActAct sanitising the judiciaryenvironmentPorozumienie dla PraworządnościAgreement for the Rule of LawMaria Ejchart-DuboisPaulina Kieszkowska-Knapikstrategic investmentPiotr HofmańskiUS State DepartmentPutinismKaczyńskilex Wośdisinformationextraordinary commissionlegislationthe Spy ActZbigniew KapińskiAnna GłowackaHelsinki Foundation for Human RightsinvestmentMałgorzata Wąsek-WiaderekOsiatyński'a ArchiveJarosław MatrasPaulina AslanowiczPiotr Raczkowskict on the Protection of the PopulatioAndrzej SkowronoppositionDariusz DończykPetros TovmasyanJerzy KwaśniewskiPiotr MazurekGrzegorz PudaNational Recovery Plan Monitoring CommitteeinsultState TribunalDonald Tusk governmenttest of independencepilot-judgmentVěra JourováTomasz Koszewskiright to an independent and impartial tribunal established by lawJakub KwiecińskidiscriminationAnti-SLAPP DirectiveODIHRcivil lawDonald TuskJustice MinistryJoanna Scheuring-WielgusAction PlanAdam GendźwiłłElżbieta Jabłońska-MalikSebastian Mazurekjustice system reformJędrzej Dessoulavy-ŚliwińskiEuropean Court of HuMałgorzata FroncRafał LisakKarolina MiklaszewskaRadosław BaszukNGOFull-Scale Election Observation MissionWałęsa v. PolandAct on the Supreme CourtLech WałęsaMichał DworczykDworczyk leaksAleksandra RutkowskaE-mail scandalRafał WojciechowskidelegationsTomasz SzmydtEmilia SzmydtWatchdog PolskaArkadiusz CichockiKaspryszyn v PolandDobrochna Bach-GoleckaMonika FrąckowiakNCR&Delection fairnessIvan Mischenkomedia pluralism#RecoveryFilesWiesław Kozielewiczelectoral commissionsMarcin MatczakChamber of Extraordinary Control and Public AffairsMałgorzata Dobiecka-WoźniakArkadiusz RadwanMarcin KrajewskiBohdan BieniekGeneral Court of the EUKrzysztof Rączkarepairing the rule of lawPoznańNational School of Judiciary and Public Prosecution (KSSiP)Koan Lenaertscodification commissionKarol WeitzŁukasz BilińskiPKWhate speechGrzęda v PolandŻurek v PolandSobczyńska and Others v PolandRafał Trzaskowskimedia lawPrzemysła RadzikElżbieta KarskaJacek Czaputowiczhate crimesChamber of Extraordinary Verificationinfringment actionEU valuesENCJIsraelforeign agents lawOrganization of Security and Co-operation in EuropeFirst President of the Suprme CourtLGBT free zonesequalityPrzemysław Czarneklegislative practiceAK judgmentSimpson judgmentpublic broadcastermutual trustLMIrelandIrena MajcherAmsterdamthe Regional Court in WarsawOpenbaar MinisterieRegional Court in AmsterdamENAZbigniew BoniekOmbudsmanKraśnikNorwayNorwegian fundsNorwegian Ministry of Foreign AffairsC-487/19Article 10 ECHRUnited NationsLeon KierespopulismLIBE CommitteeFrans TimmermansUS Department of StateSwieczkowskiadvocate generalpress releaseRights and Values ProgrammeC-619/18defamatory statementsStanisław ZabłockiCouncil of the EUequal treatmentfundamental rightsCT PresidentEUWhite Paperlustrationtransitional justice2018Nations in TransitWorld Justice Project awardWojciech SadurskiAct of 20 December 2019repressive actKoen LenaertsharrassmentAlina CzubieniakGerard BirgfellerEwa Maciejewskapostal votepostal vote billlawyersLSOjudgePechKochenovEvgeni TanchevFreedom in the WorldECJFrackowiakAmnesty Internationaltrans-Atlantic valuesresolution of 23 January 2020Olsztyn courtoligarchic systemEuropean Public Prosecutor's OfficePolish National FoundationLux VeritatisMałgorzata BednarekPiotr WawrzykTVNjournalistslexTVNclientelismArticle 258Przemysła CzarnekEducation MinisterIpsosOlimpia Barańska-MałuszeHudocKonrad SzymańskiPiotr BogdanowiczPiotr Burasauthoritarian equilibriumPolish mediaRzeszówMichał WośMinistry of FinanceJacek SasinErnest BejdaThe First President of the Supreme CourtMaciej CzajkaMariusz JałoszewskiŁukasz RadkepolexitRoman GiertychWiktor JoachimkowskiborderprimacyEU treatiesAgnieszka Niklas-BibikSłupsk Regional CourtMaciej RutkiewiczMirosław Wróblewskiright to protestSławomir JęksaDolińska-Ficek and Ozimek v PolandTribunal of StateLeszek MazurCelmerC354/20 PPUC412/20 PPUAusl 301 AR 104/19Karlsruheact on misdemeanoursCivil Service ActForum Współpracy Sędziówmedia taxGermanyMariusz Krasońinterim measuresautocratizationMultiannual Financial Frameworkabortion rulingproteststhe NetherlandsDenmarkSwedenFinlandadvertising taxmediabezwyboruArticle 2Forum shoppingEuropean Economic and Social CommitteeSebastian KaletaC-156/21C-157/21Marek PiertuszyńskiNational Prosecutor’s OfficeBogdan ŚwiączkowskiRome IIBrussels IJacek KurskiKESMAIndex.huTelex.huJelenJózsef SzájerKlubrádióGazeta WyborczaPollitykaDisicplinary Chamber