J’ACCUSE. I accuse Andrzej Duda of breaching the Polish Constitution by appointing M. Manowska to the office of First President of the Supreme Court

Share

Professor of Constitutional Law, University of Lodz

More

Constitutional law professor accuses the President of the Republic of Poland of breaching several provisions of the Constitution of Poland by appointing Małgorzata Manowska the new First President of the Supreme Court



“J’ACCUSE. I accuse Andrzej Duda of breaching the following provisions of the Polish Constitution by appointing Małgorzata Manowska to the office of First President of the Supreme Court:

1. Article 183, para. 3, whereby he appointed a person nominated by only 25 judges and not by the General Assembly;


2. Article 178, para. 1 (independence of judges), Małgorzata Manowska was appointed by the president as a Supreme Court judge on the basis of an unconstitutional motion of the neo-NCJ; she is not an independent judge. PAD disregarded the principle of judicial independence by appointing her to the office of First President of the Supreme Court;


3. Article 179, in connection from Article 187 of the Polish Constitution stipulating that judges are appointed by the President of the Republic of Poland, on the motion of the NCJ, which should include 15 judges who are representatives of the judiciary. Małgorzata Manowska is not a judge appointed in accordance with these standards, and therefore not only should not adjudicate, but also cannot hold the office of the First President of the Supreme Court.


Article 10 and Article 173 (separation of powers, separateness and independence of the judiciary) – by nominating a person who is not an independent and impartial judge to the office of First President of the Supreme Court, the President breached the independence of the Supreme Court and therefore violated the principle of the separation of powers;


5. Article 126, para. 1 and 2 (the President of the Republic of Poland guarantees the continuity of state authority; he ensures the observance of the Constitution). PAD breached the continuity of the undisturbed functioning of the judiciary and he enabled and participated in the breach of the constitutional rules and procedures in the process of selecting the First President of the Supreme Court; he has abused his constitutional role of guarantor and arbitrator;


6. Article 45, para. 1 (the right to a hearing). The Supreme Court headed by a person who is not an independent, impartial judge institutionally ceases to be an independent and impartial court;


7. Article 7 of the Polish Constitution (the principle of legalism). By participating in the procedure of selecting “candidates” for the office of First President of the Supreme Court in the manner described, PAD acted in clear breach of the legal bases and the limits of his powers defined by law;


8. Article 2 (principle of a democratic state ruled by law). No body of a democratic state ruled by law should breach the provisions of the Constitution in such a way and to such an extent.”



Author


Professor of Constitutional Law, University of Lodz


More

Published

May 26, 2020

Tags

Supreme Courtdisciplinary proceedingsrule of lawjudicial independenceDisciplinary ChamberEuropean CommissionjudgesPolandNational Council of the JudiciaryZbigniew ZiobroCourt of JusticeCourt of Justice of the EUConstitutional TribunalAndrzej DudaEuropean UnionIgor Tuleyadisciplinary systemMinister of Justicepresidential electionsjudiciarydemocracyJarosław Kaczyńskielections 2020Beata Morawiecpreliminary rulingsCJEUmuzzle lawCommissioner for Human RightsFirst President of the Supreme Courtprosecutorsdisciplinary commissionerEuropean Arrest WarrantAdam BodnarCOVID-19OSCEPresidentProsecutor Generalfreedom of expressionLaw and JusticeNCJelectionsacting first president of the Supreme CourtMay 10 2020 electionsEuropean Court of Human RightsWaldemar Żurekmedia independenceAmsterdam District CourtKrzysztof ParchimowiczMateusz Morawiecki2017Freedom HouseExtraordinary Control and Public Affairs ChamberVenice CommissionConstitutionprosecutionHungarycriminal lawNational Prosecutordisciplinary liability for judgesNational Electoral CommissionMarek SafjanKamil ZaradkiewiczGeneral Assembly of the Supreme Court JudgesAleksander StepkowskiOrdo IurisPresident of PolandMałgorzata ManowskaJarosław GowinLGBTLGBT ideology free zonesSejmMichał LasotaZuzanna Rudzińska-BluszczSylwia Gregorczyk-AbramTHEMISMaciej NawackiEAWPaweł JuszczyszynAnna DalkowskaNetherlandsPiotr Schabdemocratic backslidingdecommunizationPrime Ministerfreedom of assemblyJulia PrzyłębskaLaw on the NCJrecommendationHuman Rights CommissionerCCBEThe Council of Bars and Law Societies of EuropereportArticle 7ZiobroSupreme Administrative CourtconditionalityPM Mateusz MorawieckiEuropean Association of Judges11 January March in WarsawcoronavirusPiSC-791/19Wojciech Hermelińskiresolution of 23 January 2020Stanisław PiotrowiczPiotr PszczółkowskiJarosław WyrembakLeon KieresAndrzej ZollPKWMałgorzata Gersdorfinfringment actionEU valuesENCJlex NGOcivil societyRussiaIsraelforeign agents lawOrganization of Security and Co-operation in EuropeFirst President of the Suprme CourtPresident of the Republic of PolandLGBT free zonesequalityChamber 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 lawIustitiaKrystian MarkiewiczPrzemysła RadzikSenateMarcin WarchołElżbieta KarskaMarcin RomanowskiJacek CzaputowiczPrzemysław Czarneklegislative practiceENAZbigniew BoniekdefamationcourtsOmbudsmanKraśnikNorwayNorwegian 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 SędziówTVPmediapublic broadcasterLex Super OmniaAdam Tomczyńskiimmunitymutual trustLMBelgiumIrelandIrena MajcherAmsterdamBogdan ŚwięczkowskiNational Public ProsecutorPrzemysław Radzikthe Regional Court in WarsawCouncil of EuropeUnited Nationsjudcial independenceLeszek MazurMaciej Miteracriminal proceedingspopulisminterim measuresViktor OrbanOLAFautocratizationMultiannual Financial FrameworkNext Generation EUequal treatmentfundamental rightspoliceCT PresidentJustice Defence Committee – KOSEUWhite Paperlustrationtransitional justicepublic opinion pollSupreme Court President2018Nations in TransitCouncil of the EUStanisław ZabłockiEuropean ParliamentLIBE CommitteeFrans TimmermansUS Department of StateSwieczkowskiadvocate generalpress releaseRights and Values ProgrammeEU 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 bill