"The facts are indisputable"
The facts are indisputable. The plaintiff did not take the oath before the president and he did not assume the duties of a judge of the Constitutional Tribunal - said judge Agnieszka Wagner in the oral justification of Wednesday's judgment. She added that such a conclusion entails the conclusion that "since the plaintiff did not rule in the Constitutional Tribunal, he does not have the possibility of retiring."
Judge Wagner pointed out that "in the Polish legal system, there is no other possibility of taking an oath than before the president and a court judgment cannot replace this action." The remuneration is for work performed, there was no employment relationship and the plaintiff did not perform judicial duties - she pointed out.
Confusion over the election of Constitutional Tribunal judges in 2015.
The origins of the lawsuits filed by professors Jakubecki and Ślebzak date back to events that occurred over a decade ago.
On October 8, 2015, the Sejm of the 7th term elected - primarily with the votes of the then PO-PSL coalition - five new judges of the Constitutional Tribunal: Roman Hauser, Bronisław Sitek, Andrzej Sokala, Andrzej Jakubecki and Krzysztof Ślebzak. They were to be the successors of three judges whose terms ended on November 6 and two judges whose terms ended in December of that year, i.e. during the next parliamentary term.
On November 25, 2015, the Sejm of the new, 8th term, in which PiS already had a majority, adopted resolutions stating that the election of Constitutional Tribunal judges of October 8 had no legal force. On December 2, the Sejm elected people nominated by PiS - Julia Przyłębska, Piotr Pszczółkowski, Henryk Cioch, Lech Morawski and Mariusz Muszyński - as judges of the Constitutional Tribunal. The last three were successors of judges whose terms expired in November. These five judges were sworn in by then-President Andrzej Duda.
On December 3, 2015, the Constitutional Tribunal - at that time the president was Andrzej Rzepliński - found that the previous Sejm of the 7th term had elected two judges of the Constitutional Tribunal in a manner inconsistent with the constitution (instead of those whose terms ended in December); the election of the remaining three (replacing those whose terms ended in November) was consistent with it. The latter group included Ślebzak and Jakubecki.
The Constitutional Tribunal also found that the president was obliged to "immediately" take the oath of office from each newly elected judge. However, the three judges whose election was found to be consistent with the constitution were never taken their oaths.
On Wednesday, the district court issued a judgment regarding the lawsuit filed by Prof. Jakubecki. This happened immediately after one trial. The court, "taking into account the continuing relevance of the disputes in the Constitutional Tribunal case", decided not to charge the plaintiff with the costs of the trial.
The Constitutional Tribunal's representative was not in court on Wednesday
The Constitutional Tribunal's representative did not appear at the hearing. He requested in writing to postpone the hearing, citing the order of President Bogdan Święczkowski to establish days off for the Constitutional Tribunal's employees this week and the decision of Judge Anna Korwin-Piotrowska to temporarily suspend the performance of duties by the Tribunal's employees. The court did not accept this request.
Prof. Jakubecki: Can I "go back to the game" for a place in the Constitutional Tribunal?
Prof. Jakubecki argued in court for the validity of his lawsuit, in which - similarly to Prof. Ślebzak - formally demanded the amount related to retirement for one month.
If the lawsuit is dismissed, does it mean that my term of office has not started at all, so I can take an oath at a notary, send it to the president and "get back in the game" for a seat in the Constitutional Tribunal? - Jakubecki asked in court.
As he added, people elected to the Constitutional Tribunal in violation of the rules have now been granted retirement, while those whose rights were violated have also been deprived of retirement.
In June, the court dismissed Prof.'s lawsuit. Krzysztof Ślebzak
In the second half of June, the same Warsaw district court dismissed the lawsuit of Prof. Ślebzak. The labor court is not established to remedy constitutional delicts of the executive power by means of wage regulations, said judge Adam Pruszyński in the oral justification of the judgment.
Prof. Jakubecki appealed against this verdict.
