Pauls Raudseps

The situation in Poland is much simpler than all the talk of a “coup” suggests. PiS, Jarosław Kaczyński’s party, which backed current President Karol Nawrocki, refused to recognise three lawfully elected Constitutional Tribunal judges back in 2015, together with then-President Andrzej Duda. Those judges were Roman Hauser, Andrzej Jakubecki and Krzysztof Ślebzak. PiS installed its own picks in their seats: Henryk Cioch, Lech Morawski and Mariusz Muszyński. Even after the Tribunal confirmed that the original three had been lawfully elected, PiS and Duda refused to respect its ruling. They put their own political interests above the court’s decision. Yes, the previous PO–PSL coalition had also broken the rules by electing two additional judges before it was entitled to: Bronisław Sitek and Andrzej Sokala. But when the Tribunal ruled against those appointments, the coalition accepted the decision. Borys Budka even apologised on behalf of PO. PiS never complied with the ruling concerning the three lawfully elected judges. That difference matters. One side accepted an unfavourable ruling. The other refused to obey it. The court’s membership changed over the years. Cioch and Morawski died in 2017 and were replaced by Jarosław Wyrembak and Justyn Piskorski. Muszyński’s nine-year term ended in December 2024. Other judges’ terms ended too. Seats became vacant, and new judges needed to be elected. Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal judges are elected by the Sejm, the lower house of parliament, for nine-year terms. Donald Tusk’s governing coalition currently holds a majority there. That majority has the constitutional right to elect judges to fill those vacancies. PiS losing its parliamentary majority did not give it the right to block that process indefinitely. The Sejm elected eight new judges. President Nawrocki accepted the oaths of three: Magdalena Bentkowska, Dariusz Szostek and Sławomir Patyra. But he refused to accept the oaths of the other five: Krystian Markiewicz, Maciej Taborowski, Marcin Dziurda, Anna Korwin-Piotrowska and Maciej Berek. They eventually took their oaths without him present, formally addressing them to the president. The oath is required by law. But it does not give the president a personal veto over parliament’s choice of judges. He is required to accept their oaths. The Tribunal itself ruled on this back in 2015. In October 2026, the Venice Commission backed that interpretation and supported allowing judges to take their oaths without the president physically present if he blocks the process, provided the necessary formalities are followed. Yet the leadership of the very same Tribunal where PiS had unlawfully installed its own judges refused to let the new judges do their jobs. The court’s president, Bogdan Święczkowski, insisted that they could not serve unless they took their oaths in Nawrocki’s presence. The president blocked the normal procedure, and the Tribunal’s leadership used that blockage to keep them out. On October 30, Anna Korwin-Piotrowska announced the temporary suspension of Święczkowski and his deputy, Bartłomiej Sochański, and assumed leadership of the Tribunal. Lawyers dispute whether she had the legal authority to suspend them in that way. That specific step deserves legal scrutiny. It does not erase the obstruction that led to it. I support Tusk’s efforts to end this obstruction, and I don’t buy the claims of a coup. PiS does not get to unlawfully install its own judges, refuse to respect court rulings, and then demand that everyone treat the situation it created as untouchable. Tusk is right to push back. Judges elected by the Sejm should be allowed to do their jobs. The president has constitutional duties, not a personal veto over the court’s membership. And PiS has no permanent claim to Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal.