Talks over appointments to Poland’s Constitutional Court burden the power struggle

The European Court of Human Rights had already identified serious deficiencies during the PiS’s tenure in the appointments of judges and the then-president of Poland’s Constitutional Court. “During the PiS’s tenure, the European Court of Human Rights found that Poland’s Constitutional Court could not be regarded as independent and impartial because of serious deficiencies in the appointment of its judges and then-president under the PiS.”

Earlier criticism of the European Court of Human Rights

The current debate therefore concerns a court whose independence and impartiality had previously been called into question by the European Court of Human Rights. The verified facts show that, according to the Court’s findings at the time, the court could not be regarded as independent and impartial.

Poles such as Bogdan Swieczkowski, Donald Tusk, Anna Korwin-Piotrowska, as well as PiS and the co-governing Left, are in a close geographic and political proximity to the events. However, the verified information does not associate those involved with any specific outcome of the ongoing consultations.

The roles of the individuals named in the current negotiations can only be partially inferred from the confirmed information. For a reliable account, the directly documented proceedings and the Left’s expressly stated position are therefore given precedence.

The dispute over appointments to the Constitutional Court touches on political_balance and institutional checks and balances in Poland. An independent judiciary is of central importance to the credibility of the rule of law and to checks on state decisions.

Implications for the rule of law

The outcome of the consultations led by Nawrocki remains uncertain. The verified facts identify neither a final slate of appointees nor the completion of the process, and also provide no indication of an immediate response from the court to the current talks.