What do politicians propose to change about the Tribunal, and why do some oppose a reset? Statements below include dates and source links.
Calls for a constitutional amendment and new selection of judicial bodies; its broader proposal covers the Tribunal, Supreme Court and National Council of the Judiciary.
According to PAP, it supports a reset and selection of a new Tribunal. This is support for a direction, not confirmed agreement with every proposal.
Following consultations, Adrian Zandberg proposed a Tribunal reset secured by a constitutional amendment.
Krzysztof Szczucki outlined to PAP a model of 12 judges elected by a three-fifths majority, with staggered initial terms.
Arkadiusz Myrcha fears an amnesty for breaches of the law. Maciej Tomczykiewicz is open to discussing selection by a three-fifths majority.
Michał Wójcik opposes removing people he regards as lawful judges and the lawful Tribunal leadership.
Paweł Śliz emphasises admitting the elected judges to perform their duties. The cited remarks do not clearly endorse a reset.
PAP reports Anna Maria Żukowska’s scepticism about amending the Constitution in relation to the Tribunal.
The Chancellery confirmed consultations. Mentzen’s account of presidential approval is not equivalent to official endorsement of a completed draft.
Article 130: the basis for the orders and legal objections →
The president described the overnight events as a breach of constitutional order and a forcible takeover of the institution. He called on the coercive forces deployed there to leave the grounds. He stated that he had enabled Bartłomiej Sochański, whom he regards as the lawful vice-president, to enter.
He announced consultations with parliamentary representatives.
The prime minister argued that lawfully elected individuals had been prevented from working by the president and Tribunal president. He presented the police action as protecting the Tribunal and its judges from attackers.
He rejected a compromise that, in his view, would reward unlawful conduct.
According to a published account of its 31 October statement, the Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights questioned the use of Article 130 of the Law on the Organisation of Ordinary Courts to remove the Tribunal leadership from duties. At the same time it supported a reset along the lines described in the Batory Foundation analysis.
Assessment: proposals exist, but the cited declarations do not demonstrate a majority for a single text. Differing models and opposition from KO and PiS representatives are substantial obstacles.
Prospects depend on agreement over the draft, transitional rules and the required majorities in both chambers. With all 460 MPs casting valid votes, the Sejm threshold is 307. Adding up seats held by parties sympathetic to the idea does not substitute for declared support for specific provisions.
The next steps would be a joint draft, sponsors’ signatures and votes. Only then could support for specific provisions be assessed.
Compare the proposals in detail →