Abstract
One of the politically momentous and legally precedential constitutional problems of recent years which had to be faced by the Polish constitutional court has been the dispute whether it is possible to exclude the applicable statute defining the organization and procedure of the CT proceedings as a basis for adjudication.An analysis of the judgment of the Tribunal addressing that issue proves that the Polish constitutional court excluded the possibility that the same regulation could serve simultaneously as the object of control and the basis for control proceedings.This results from the essence of constitutional control of the law which in such arrangement of its key elements would simply repeal itself, i.e. would lead to its own invalidation.Subordination of constitutional judges exclusively to the Constitution extends to all actions they perform in serving their office and other consubstantial manifestations of exercising the power to judge.This is a derivative of jurisprudential responsibilities of the Tribunal, which include both passing a final judgment as to compliance of challenged statutes, as well as other acts of application of law.Art. 195 (1) in fine of the Polish Constitution lays down a competence norm for a CT judge to refuse, in specific circumstances, to abide by the CT Act. One of the analytical assumptions is recognition of the finality of CT judgments.The possibility to exclude a provision of the CT Act is an action in the area of application of law.Determination of the legal framework for passing judgments has nothing in common with constitutional control of challenged statutes.Those actions derive from totally different orders and their goals are differe.
Highlights
In 2015 and 2016, within a few months, the Polish Constitutional Tribunal passed a series of verdicts on regulations concerning its organization and procedures
The CT faced the most serious challenge in the case concerning the Act of 22 December 2015 on amendments to the Constitutional Tribunal Act[1], which in legal journalism was somewhat ironically called “reparative”. It provided for numerous modifications of the procedures to be followed by the CT, including the rules for the preparation of hearings and closed sessions, appointment of CT adjudicating panels, the order in which cases are considered, as well as the status of CT judges and the activity of the General Assembly of the Judges of the Constitutional Tribunal
The constitutional review of the Amending Act was initiated in five motions addressed to the CT which were submitted by: the First President of the Supreme Court, two groups of parliamentarians, the Ombudsman and the National Council of the Judiciary
Summary
In 2015 and 2016, within a few months, the Polish Constitutional Tribunal passed a series of verdicts on regulations concerning its organization and procedures. The CT faced the most serious challenge in the case concerning the Act of 22 December 2015 on amendments to the Constitutional Tribunal Act[1] (hereafter: the Amending Act or the CT Act), which in legal journalism was somewhat ironically called “reparative” It provided for numerous modifications of the procedures to be followed by the CT, including the rules for the preparation of hearings and closed sessions, appointment of CT adjudicating panels, the order in which cases are considered, as well as the status of CT judges and the activity of the General Assembly of the Judges of the Constitutional Tribunal.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
