The Constitutional Court, chaired by Julia Przyłębska, has decided to bring the president of the National Bank of Poland, Adam Glapiński, to the State Court.
The Constitutional Court ruled in the State Court case of Adam Glapiński
A group of deputies requested an analysis of compliance with:
- art. 7 of the Law of March 26, 1982 on the State Court (Official Gazette of 2022, item 762), to the extent applicable preliminary application to hold the President of the National Bank of Poland accountable before the State Courtjoke. Section 227 1 in connection with art. Section 227 2 in connection with art. Section 227 3 of the Constitution,
- art. 8 of the Act referred to in point 1, insofar as it applies to the President of the National Bank of Poland, of art. Section 227 1 in connection with art. Section 227 2 in connection with art. Section 227 3 of the Constitution,
- art. Section 9d 1 of the Act referred to in point 1, to the extent applicable mandatory appearance of the President of the National Bank of Poland before the Constitutional Accountability Committeejoke. Section 227 1 in connection with art. Section 227 2 in connection with art. Section 227 3 of the Constitution,
- art. Section 9g 2 of the Law referred to in point 1, to the extent applicable adoption by the Commission on Constitutional Accountability of a report on holding the President of the National Bank of Poland accountable before the State Courtjoke. Section 227 1 in connection with art. Section 227 2 in connection with art. Section 227 3 of the Constitution,
- art. 127 of the resolution of the Sejm of the Republic of Poland of July 30, 1992 – Regulation of the Sejm of the Republic of Poland (MP of 2022, item 990, as amended) with regard to the preliminary application for the arrest of the Chairman of the National Bank of Poland is liable to the State Court, joke. Section 227 1 in connection with Art. Section 227 2 in connection with Art. Section 227 3 of the Constitution.
It was decided that:
- art. 8 of the Act of 26 March 1982 On the State Court (Official Gazette of 2022, item 762, as amended), insofar as it applies to the Chairman of the National Bank of Poland, is inconsistent with art. Section 227 1 in connection with art. Section 227 2 in connection with art. Section 227 3 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland.
- art. Section 9d Article 1 of the Act referred to in point 1, insofar as it concerns the mandatory appearance of the Chairman of the National Bank of Poland before the Constitutional Accountability Commission, is inconsistent with art. Section 227 1 in connection with art. Section 227 2 in connection with art. Section 227 3 of the Constitution.
- art. Section 9g Article 2 of the Act referred to in point 1, insofar as it concerns the adoption by the Constitutional Accountability Commission of the report on holding the Chairman of the National Bank of Poland accountable before the State Court, is inconsistent with art. Section 227 1 in connection with art. Section 227 2 in connection with art. Section 227 3 of the Constitution.
“This ruling comes into force on the day of the Constitutional Court’s announcement, which took place at today’s hearing. The conclusion that the contested provisions are unconstitutional means that all proceedings conducted on the basis of them lose their legal basis.“- we read in the statement after the Constitutional Court’s decision.
It was decided close the process in the remaining scopeand this decision was taken unanimously. The case was heard by the Constitutional Court consisting of: Julia Przyłębska, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski, Krystyna Pawłowicz, Bartłomiej Sochański, Bogdan Święczkowski.
Kosiniak-Kamysz: The case will be solved
Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz commented on the matter today, after the Council of Ministers meeting. – Mr Glapiński’s affairs – regardless of whether it is today or tomorrow – will be resolved – he said.
– Polish politics and Polish democracy over the past 30 years have not had any positive experience in effectively presenting final conclusions to someone before the State Court. This also raises a thought about how to enforce constitutional responsibility – because it has been imperfect in this regard for many years and the processes are long-lasting, but sooner or later they will reach their goal – said Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz.
– As far as President Glapiński is concerned, such motions are being filed so that he can fulfil his mission – a motion to be filed with the State Court. The Constitutional Court should consider this request. But regardless of that, these negligences and omissions by President Glapiński certainly mean that Prime Minister Tusk’s vision – from before the elections and now – has not changed – the Deputy Prime Minister added.
Politicians comment on Constitutional Court decision
Other former opposition politicians have also commented on the matter. Ryszard Petru of Poland 2050 stressed that “the Julia Przyłębska Court is trying to protect President Glapiński from constitutional responsibility.” He added: “This desperate measure will not serve any purpose – President Glapiński will be held accountable for his actions“.
In turn, Dariusz Rosati wrote: “A pathetic masquerade ball performed by a group pretending to be the Constitutional Court. It is known that they will do whatever Kaczyński tells them to do and it is known that their “trials” are meaningless.”
