Czech President Pavel Sues Government Over NATO Summit Delegation Exclusion

Czech President Petr Pavel on Tuesday said that he had filed a lawsuit against the government, challenging Prime Minister Andrej Babiš's decision to not include him in the government delegation attending the NATO summit in Ankara in July.

The competency suit, which was lodged with Czechia's Constitutional Court, asks for clarity on who has the authority to decide whether the head of state may attend the NATO summit. The court is due to take up the matter during its plenary session on Wednesday.

In a statement, Pavel argued Babiš was trying to "exclude" him from the summit, and thus "limiting the role granted to him by the Constitution."

The president pointed out that his predecessors had attended all previous NATO summits, and that he had been present at every one of the alliance's gatherings since he took office in 2023.

After months of contention over who would represent Prague in Ankara, Babiš on Monday announced the head of state could not join the official delegation because "this summit will be different from previous ones."

During the upcoming gathering, the prime minister will be expected to justify his decision to cut core military spending to around 1.8 percent of GDP, below the 2 percent NATO target. Babiš's move to bar Pavel from the gathering may have to do with the former general's opposition to the cuts, which he deemed "irresponsible."

Babiš on Tuesday said that while he "respected" the president's decision to file suit, he did not "think it's a good idea."

"It is not appropriate for constitutional officials to file lawsuits against one another," he wrote on X.

The dispute is the latest escalation in a rocky relationship between the two Czech politicians, who faced off in the 2023 presidential election.

In his statement, Pavel insisted the latest clash was "not really about one chair at one foreign meeting," but about the separation of powers.

"If I did not defend these powers, I would bear some responsibility for opening the door wide open to further arbitrary curtailment of the powers of constitutional officials," he wrote.