On Friday, September 6, the so-called complaints filed with the Warsaw Provincial Administrative Court against the president’s decision and the prime minister’s endorsement. Former judges of the Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court Dariusz Zawistowski and Karol Weitz filed complaints. These are probably the first complaints to the court about the president’s interference in the independence of the Supreme Court and the prime minister’s endorsement of this interference.
The matter is extremely urgent
As Mariusz Jałoszewski notes in OKO.press, the preliminary ruling of the Provincial Administrative Court (to suspend the execution of both decisions until the court has properly examined the complaint) should be issued very quickly, on Monday, September 9. This is what Judges Zawistowski and Weitz are requesting. The following day, Tuesday, September 10, the Assembly of Judges of the Civil Chamber will be held and the candidates for the new president of this chamber will be elected. He will appoint new judges, from among whom the president will appoint a new president for a three-year term. If this were to happen, it could be considered that there have been irreversible legal consequences. In such a situation, the subsequent decision of the Provincial Administrative Court would concern the historical legal status.
The Provincial Administrative Court suspended the execution of the president’s decision once, in February 2023, at an extraordinary pace – OKO.press indicates. The idea was to direct the so-called legal judge of the Supreme Court Paweł Grzegorczyk to judge in the Chamber of Professional Responsibility the legality of which is questioned.
The Prime Minister can revoke the referendum
OKO.press offers another way to solve the problem of the Prime Minister’s incorrect referendum. Well, Donald Tusk can quickly revoke it as part of the so-called self-control. This is possible because the complaint against the referendum was filed with the court through the Chancellery of the Prime Minister. In such a situation, the administrative procedure provides that the authority that issued the contested decision can, through self-reflection, change its initial decision.
