E-mail scandal. Dworczyk discussed the timing of forthcoming judgments of the Constitutional Tribunal with Przyłębska


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


Michał Dworczyk discussed the forthcoming decisions of the Constitutional Tribunal with Julia Przyłębska – as arises from the e-mails posted on Poufna Rozmowa. The head of the Prime Minister’s Chancellery reported on his discussion with the president of the Constitutional Tribunal in e-mails to Mateusz Morawiecki.

by Magdalena Gałczyńska


  • Dworczyk discussed future decisions of the Constitutional Tribunal that were to have an impact on the State budget with Przyłębska
  • Dworczyk listed these costs in his e-mail to the prime minister, estimating the expenditure from the State’s coffers
  • ‘A politician visiting the Constitutional Tribunal? This is absolutely unacceptable practice, but recent years have shown that it is becoming increasingly common,’ Wojciech Hermeliński, retired judge of the Constitutional Tribunal and former head of the State Electoral Committee tells Onet. 
  • The head of the Prime Minister’s Chancellery did not respond to our requests for contact.
  • Julia Przyłębska addressed the whole matter in ‘Trójkowy komentarz dnia’ [Commentary of the day in Radio Three]
  • Screenshots from Michał Dworczyk’s private mailbox, as well as those of other politicians and activists associated with the ruling camp, have been appearing since the beginning of June 2021 in the Poufna Rozmowa [Confidential Talk] website.


‘I visited Ms Julia P. today (shortly after your conversation). I discussed 3 topics with the president’ – this is how Michał Dworczyk’s e-mail sent to Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki on 7 January 2019 starts. The title of the e-mail states that it applies to the ‘CT’. As can be easily guessed, ‘Julia’ is the president of the Constitutional Tribunal, Julia Przyłębska. Dworczyk discussed the tribunal’s forthcoming decisions with her. Specifically, the dates of the hearings and the judges who were most likely to be the rapporteurs or presiding judges of the benches in these cases. And so, in an e-mail to the Prime Minister, Dworczyk listed the subjects discussed with the president of the CT:


1. People born in 53 – deferred for now (Kieres, 250 million – 1.5 billion)


2. Custody benefit deferred for now (Muszyński) until 19 February (approx. 5 billion) 


3. Easements on land for transmission deferred for now (Muszyński) (a dozen or so billion)


What are these cases about? The CT ruling on the people born in 1953 (passed on 6 March 2019, which was several months after the conversation between Dworczyk and Przyłębska mentioned in the e-mail) applied to women born in 1953. The Tribunal declared the mechanism for reducing the basis of the pension without notice as being unconstitutional. It then held that, when deciding to retire early, women did not know that this could affect their retirement benefits.


In the summer of 2020, the senators adopted an amendment to the Act on Pensions from the Social Insurance Fund without making any amendments to the bill. This will allow the benefits of pensioners born in 1953 to be recalculated on a more favourable basis. This meant costs for the state budget. This is probably what the amounts in brackets in Dworczyk’s e-mail to Morawiecki mean.


The other two cases also applied to forthcoming decisions of the CT. These three cases have one thing in common, as we mentioned – the tribunal’s decision in each case involved costs for the State budget.


‘A politician visiting the Constitutional Tribunal? This is absolutely unacceptable practice, but recent years have shown that it is becoming increasingly common,’ Wojciech Hermeliński, retired judge of the Constitutional Tribunal and former head of the State Electoral Committee tells Onet. ‘We have already had, as the media reported, visits from MP Arkadiusz Mularczyk to the CT, and the head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Administration, Mariusz Kamiński, had also been there. This is an unthinkable situation. This would never have happened during Professor Andrzej Rzepliński’s presidency,’ he emphasises. ‘I remember when Professor Rzepliński was president of the Constitutional Tribunal; an MP entered the part of the Tribunal occupied by judges. When the president heard about this, he became extremely annoyed. He immediately ordered the doors to that part of the tribunal to be locked and said that such visits must never take place. It was unthinkable for a politician to show up in the section of the CT assigned for judges,’ says Judge Hermeliński. ‘But today? I see this has become the norm. I am lost for words, it’s all very sad,’ he concludes.


During the press conference, a government spokesperson was asked about today’s publication in Poufna Rozmowa. ‘I shall not comment on Russian intelligence activities,’ said Piotr Müller.


Julia Przyłębska addressed the whole matter in ‘Trójkowy komentarz dnia’ ‘I never discuss any judgments with anyone,’ she said.


E-mail scandal. How it started


Screenshots purported to come from Michał Dworczyk’s private mailbox, as well as those of other politicians and activists associated with the ruling camp, have been appearing in the internet since the beginning of June last year. On 9 June, the head of the Prime Minister’s Chancellery declared on Twitter that the hacking of his and his wife’s e-mailboxes, as well as their social media accounts, had been reported to the State services.


Since then, new messages from Michal Dworczyk’s e-mail account have been appearing in the web. These probably included confidential information about the Polish army’s weapons, the disclosure of the details of the defence negotiations with other countries, as well as internal conversations of Mateusz Morawiecki’s closest environment, including those that also involved him.

The article in Polish was published at Onet.pl


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



July 6, 2022


Supreme CourtDisciplinary ChamberConstitutional Tribunaldisciplinary proceedingsPolandrule of lawZbigniew ZiobroEuropean CommissionCourt of Justice of the EUjudgesjudicial independenceNational Council of the JudiciaryEuropean UnionCourt of JusticeAndrzej DudaMałgorzata ManowskaIgor Tuleyadisciplinary systemEuropean Court of Human RightsMateusz MorawieckiCommissioner for Human RightsCJEUMinister of JusticeJarosław KaczyńskiWaldemar Żurekdemocracymuzzle lawpresidential electionsjudiciaryAdam Bodnarpreliminary rulingsK 3/21Hungaryelections 2020Kamil Zaradkiewiczdisciplinary commissionerBeata MorawiecPiotr SchabPrzemysław RadzikFirst President of the Supreme CourtprosecutorsEuropean Arrest WarrantMaciej NawackiPrime MinisterJulia Przyłębskamedia freedomProsecutor GeneralConstitutionCOVID-19National Council for JudiciaryMichał LasotaPresidentfreedom of expressionŁukasz PiebiakCourt of Justice of the European Unioncriminal lawdisciplinary liability for judgesWojciech HermelińskiMarek SafjanAleksander StepkowskiNational Recovery PlanOSCEPaweł JuszczyszynAnna DalkowskaNational Public Prosecutorcriminal proceedingsfreedom of assemblyStanisław BiernatExtraordinary Control and Public Affairs ChamberSupreme Administrative Courtconditionality mechanismconditionalityEU budgetWłodzimierz WróbelCriminal ChamberLaw and JusticeprosecutionNCJMinistry of JusticeNational ProsecutorDagmara Pawełczyk-WoickaelectionsStanisław PiotrowiczJarosław WyrembakAndrzej ZollMałgorzata Gersdorfacting first president of the Supreme CourtOrdo IurisK 7/21May 10 2020 electionsLex DudaNational Reconstruction PlanPresident of PolandPresident of the Republic of PolandSejmXero Flor w Polsce Sp. z o.o. v. PolandBroda and Bojara v Polandmedia independenceIustitiaJarosław DudziczSylwia Gregorczyk-AbramAmsterdam District CourtKrzysztof ParchimowiczArticle 6 ECHRTHEMISEAWUrsula von der LeyenmediaimmunityCouncil of Europe2017policeJustice Defence Committee – KOSFreedom HouseLech GarlickiEwa ŁętowskaSupreme Court PresidentArticle 7Venice CommissionPM Mateusz MorawieckiAndrzej StępkaRecovery FundP 7/20Justice Fundneo-judgesPiSC-791/19National Electoral CommissionAstradsson v IcelandK 6/21Piotr PszczółkowskiPegasusGeneral Assembly of the Supreme Court Judgeslex NGOcivil societyRussiaProfessional Liability ChamberJoanna Hetnarowicz-SikorasuspensionJarosław GowinLGBTLGBT ideology free zonesReczkowicz and Others v. PolandUkraineKrystian MarkiewiczKonrad WytrykowskiJakub IwaniecZuzanna Rudzińska-BluszczDariusz DrajewiczRafał PuchalskidefamationcourtsMichał WawrykiewiczFree CourtsMarzanna Piekarska-DrążekEwa WrzosekEU law primacyTVPLex Super OmniaAdam TomczyńskiBelgiumNetherlandsBogdan Święczkowskijudcial independenceMaciej Miterademocratic backslidingViktor OrbanOLAFdecommunizationNext Generation EUvetoJózef IwulskiLaw on the NCJrecommendationTeresa Dębowska-RomanowskaKazimierz DziałochaMirosław GranatAdam JamrózStefan JaworskiBiruta Lewaszkiewicz-PetrykowskaWojciech ŁączkowskiHuman Rights CommissionerMarek MazurkiewiczCCBEAndrzej MączyńskiThe Council of Bars and Law Societies of EuropeJanusz NiemcewiczMałgorzata Pyziak- SzafnickaStanisław Rymarpublic opinion pollFerdynand RymarzAndrzej RzeplińskiJerzy StępieńPiotr TulejaSławomira Wronkowska-JaśkiewiczMirosław WyrzykowskireportBohdan ZdziennickiMarek ZubikDidier ReyndersEuropean ParliamentOKO.pressZiobroMichał LaskowskiMarek PietruszyńskitransferPiotr GąciarekKrystyna PawłowiczMariusz MuszyńskiRegional Court in KrakówPiebiak gatehuman rightscorruptionEuropean Association of Judges11 January March in WarsawPaweł FilipekMaciej TaborowskiAdam SynakiewiczBelarusstate of emergencycoronavirusXero Flor v. PolandEU treatiesAgnieszka Niklas-BibikSłupsk Regional CourtMaciej Rutkiewiczresolution of 23 January 2020Mirosław WróblewskiCivil ChamberJoanna Misztal-KoneckaLeon Kieresright to protestSławomir JęksaPKWWiktor JoachimkowskiRoman GiertychMariusz Kamińskiinfringment actionsurveillanceEU valuesMichał WośMinistry of FinanceCentral Anti-Corruption BureauENCJJacek SasinErnest BejdaThe First President of the Supreme CourtMaciej CzajkaMariusz JałoszewskiIsraelŁukasz Radkeforeign agents lawpolexitDolińska-Ficek and Ozimek v PolandOrganization of Security and Co-operation in EuropeFirst President of the Suprme CourtPaulina Kieszkowska-KnapikMaria Ejchart-DuboisAgreement for the Rule of LawPorozumienie dla PraworządnościLGBT free zonesAct sanitising the judiciaryequalityMarek AstMaciej FerekChamber of Extraordinary VerificationEdyta Barańskahate crimesCourt of Appeal in Krakówhate speechPutinismcriminal codeKaczyńskiGrzęda v Polandright to fair trialPaulina AslanowiczJarosław MatrasŻurek v PolandMałgorzata Wąsek-WiaderekSobczyńska and Others v Polandct on the Protection of the PopulatioparliamentlegislationRafał Trzaskowskilex Wośmedia lawRome StatuteInternational Criminal CourtPrzemysła RadzikAntykastaSenateStanisław ZdunIrena BochniakKrystyna Morawa-FryźlewiczMarcin WarchołKatarzyna ChmuraElżbieta KarskaMarcin RomanowskiGrzegorz FurmankiewiczJacek CzaputowiczMarek JaskulskiPrzemysław CzarnekJoanna Kołodziej-Michałowiczlegislative practiceEwa ŁąpińskaZbigniew ŁupinaENAPaweł StyrnaZbigniew BoniekKasta/AntykastaAndrzej SkowronŁukasz BilińskiIvan MischenkoOmbudsmanMonika FrąckowiakArkadiusz CichockiKraśnikEmilia SzmydtNorwayTomasz SzmydtNorwegian fundssmear campaignNorwegian Ministry of Foreign AffairsE-mail scandalDworczyk leaksMichał DworczykC-487/19media pluralism#RecoveryFilesArticle 10 ECHRmilestonesConstitutional Tribunal PresidentRegional Court in Amsterdamrepairing the rule of lawharassmentOpenbaar MinisterieAK judgmentBohdan BieniekSimpson judgmentMarcin KrajewskiChamber of Professional LiabilityForum Współpracy SędziówMałgorzata Dobiecka-Woźniakpublic broadcastermutual trustLMIrelandIrena MajcherAmsterdamthe Regional Court in WarsawUnited NationsLeszek Mazurpopulisminterim 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 WyborczaUS 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 StatePechOlsztyn courtKochenovPrzemysła CzarnekEvgeni TanchevEducation MinisterFreedom in the WorldECJIpsosFrackowiakOlimpia Barańska-Małuszeretirement ageAmnesty InternationalHudocKonrad SzymańskiPiotr Bogdanowicztrans-Atlantic valuesPiotr BurasLSOauthoritarian equilibriumlawyersArticle 258Act of 20 December 2019clientelismoligarchic systemEuropean Public Prosecutor's Officerepressive actPolish National FoundationLux VeritatisKoen LenaertsMałgorzata BednarekPiotr WawrzykharrassmentMarian BanaśAlina CzubieniakSupreme Audit OfficeTVNjournalistslexTVNGerard BirgfellerEwa MaciejewskaPolish mediapostal voteKrakówRzeszówborderpostal vote billprimacy