On Tuesday, President Karol Nawrocki submitted a motion to the Constitutional Tribunal to examine whether the regulation issued by the Minister of Justice concerning the random selection of judges complies with the Constitution. According to the head of state, Waldemar Żurek, he acted unlawfully in issuing it. As announced during a press conference by the Head of the Chancellery of the President, Zbigniew Bogucki, a notification of a suspected criminal offense has also been filed in connection with the Minister of Justice’s decision. “We’ll see whether the prosecutor’s office is truly independent,” he remarked.
Bogucki listed the key articles of the Constitution that, in his view, the Minister of Justice’s regulation violates – seven in total.
“As you can see, Mr. Żurek is quite ambitious. This is not about one constitutional provision being violated by this unlawful regulation, but several. In essence, this is an attempt by the executive branch – through Minister Żurek, acting, as I understand it, under the authority of Prime Minister Tusk – to point a political finger at which judges should hear cases. Instead of judges being randomly assigned, as has been the practice, they would now be designated. And in such a way that in three-judge panels, only one judge would be selected at random, while the other two could be handpicked – either by the head of a division or by the president of the court,”
the Head of the Presidential Chancellery stated.
He recalled that, in the president’s view, court presidents are currently being appointed unlawfully, without consultation with the National Council of the Judiciary (KRS).
“Thus, the presidents who are appointed by Minister Żurek are then to designate the heads of divisions, and together they would determine the composition of judicial panels,”
he emphasized.
Bogucki stressed that there is no better system than the random selection of judges, as it alone guarantees impartiality and prevents the manipulation of judicial assignments.
“We do not need – and here’s an appeal to Minister Żurek and this government – trusted judges of any minister, whoever he may be. What we need are independent judges, independent courts, not judges who, as I understand it, are to be ‘warmed up’ for specific cases to deliver rulings favorable to those in power,”
he declared.
“This government and Minister Żurek lack the power to push their often illegal, unlawful, and scandalous decisions through parliament and obtain the president’s signature. Therefore, they are trying, in an absolutely conscious, ostentatious, and unprecedented manner, to break the law and bypass the president’s prerogatives. In essence, if there is no presidential signature under a statute, there is no consent for this kind of solution, which belongs in a statute. That is why Mr. Żurek wants to impose it through a regulation,” he emphasized.
The Head of the Presidential Chancellery also reiterated the president’s appeal to judges:
“You are bound only by the Constitution and by statutes, not by regulations – especially those that are clearly unlawful, inconsistent with statutory law, and issued without a legal basis,”
he said.
Notification to the Prosecutor’s Office
Bogucki also reported that, as Head of the Presidential Chancellery, “following the motion to the Constitutional Tribunal,” he filed a notice with the Warsaw District Prosecutor’s Office concerning the possible commission of a criminal offense by Żurek.
“We shall see whether the prosecutor’s office is independent; whether it will take up the case and conduct the investigation,”
he stated.
In the justification of the motion to the prosecutor’s office, he emphasized – citing opinions from the Government Legislation Centre, as well as representatives of judicial and legal circles – that Żurek’s actions violate several articles of the Constitution “through the unlawful interference of an executive authority in the independence of the judiciary, the independence of judges, and the autonomy of courts. This violates the citizens’ right to an impartial court established by law by creating the possibility of arbitrarily appointing judicial panels. Consequently, the Minister issued an executive act without statutory authorization and in contradiction to the law, thereby exceeding his powers as Minister of Justice and acting to the detriment of the public interest – namely, the rule of law, the independence of the judiciary, and the citizens’ right to an impartial court established by law.”