Art. 7 of the Constitution: Public authorities operate [only] on the basis of and within the law.
Art. 197 of the Constitution: The organization and the procedure before the CT determined by law.
Article 90 of the Law on CT with July 22, 2016 instructs President CT , ie. A. Rzeplińskiemu immediate assignment of cases and the inclusion of the rule of three judges elected by the current parliament and sworn by the President of the RP .
President A. Rzepliński “will not let these three judges to rule.” Judge CT M. Muszyński in a letter to A. Rzepliński pursuant to art. 90 of the Law on CT 22 July. asks for admission to the rule of three judges elected by the current parliament.
Prosecutor’s Office in Katowice, conducting an investigation on claims of individuals against A. Rzeplińskiemu the offense clerical non-execution obligation under the law.
at this president A. Rzepliński: “this [procedure] is interference in the activities of the Court and autonomy of the judiciary.”
the question is whether the president A. Rzepliński be subject to the ordinary law in the event of a breach?
Answer: SUBJECT .
The independence and autonomy of courts nOT is not subject to the ordinary law.
Art.196 Constitution EXPECTED KARN a LIABILITY SC judges CT . Judge CT MO THAT be held liable CRIMINAL PENALTIES and FREE OF NOT S CI , so that the consent of the Constitutional Court, ie. on the basis of its the resolution in the plenary session. ONLY so CT the full court can deprive a judge CT immunity in this case, . Judge CT , under this provision, it can also be STOPPED or arrested if it was necessary for the proper conduct of the proceedings. This must, however, notify the President of the CT , may order an immediate release of the judge.
So, the judge CT MO THAT be held criminally responsible, but in the current situation on the SAME PRESIDENT and its entanglement in a strong political argument against the ruling party, this procedure is only theoretical, impractical. President CT THE will not allow harm done. As president CT is a judge in their own case, and certainly do not agree with the majority, which is now in the CT , lead to each procedure.
the case Rzepliński showed what you will need to change on the Court in the future, that law was not a sham to protect pathologies judges.
Krystyna Pavlovich
Source: Cable Republic
No comments:
Post a Comment