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 Courtrule of lawdisciplinary proceedingsEuropean CommissionDisciplinary Chamberjudicial independenceNational Council of the JudiciaryCourt of JusticeConstitutional TribunalAndrzej DudajudgesPolandelections 2020presidential electionsEuropean UniondemocracyZbigniew ZiobrojudiciaryFirst President of the Supreme Courtpreliminary rulingsCJEUMinister of JusticeCourt of Justice of the EUIgor TuleyaJarosław KaczyńskiCOVID-19PresidentProsecutor GeneralprosecutorsLaw and Justicemuzzle lawelectionsCommissioner for Human Rightsacting first president of the Supreme CourtMay 10 2020 elections2017Freedom HouseExtraordinary Control and Public Affairs ChamberVenice CommissionConstitutionNCJcriminal lawdisciplinary systemNational Electoral CommissionKamil ZaradkiewiczGeneral Assembly of the Supreme Court JudgesAleksander StepkowskiPresident of PolandMałgorzata Manowskademocratic backslidingdecommunizationfreedom of assemblyJulia PrzyłębskaLaw on the NCJrecommendationAdam BodnarHuman Rights CommissionerCCBEThe Council of Bars and Law Societies of EuropereportZiobroPM Mateusz Morawieckifreedom of expressionprosecutionEuropean Association of Judges11 January March in WarsawHungaryNational ProsecutorcoronavirusC-791/19disciplinary liability for judgesWojciech Hermelińskiresolution of 23 January 2020Stanisław PiotrowiczPiotr PszczółkowskiJarosław WyrembakLeon KieresAndrzej ZollPKWMarek SafjanMałgorzata Gersdorfinfringment actionEU valuesENCJlex NGOcivil societyRussiaIsraelforeign agents lawOrdo IurisOSCEOrganization of Security and Co-operation in EuropeEuropean Court of Human RightsFirst President of the Suprme CourtPresident of the Republic of PolandJarosław GowinLGBTLGBT free zonesequalityLGBT ideology free zonesSejmChamber of Extraordinary Verificationhate crimeshate speechcriminal codepopulismMateusz MorawieckiPrime Ministerequal 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