ETPCz can issue temporary measures, but cannot appoint judges of the Constitutional Tribunal or replace the president of the Republic of Poland in systemic activities. If the vow was not made in a lawful form, then the ETPC decision cannot make a legal fact which is not in our constitution
The designation and non-recognition of judgments, judges and full institutions, is the everyday life in the country over the Vistula River, no different yesterday erstwhile the European Court of Human Rights issued a ruling in the media. The case is exceptional in almost all respect, as it concerns candidates for judges to the Constitutional Court: Krystian Markiewicz, Maciej Taborowski, Marcin Dziurda and Anna Korwin-Piotrowska, who felt that they could decide themselves before whom they vowed, and as part of this independent decision they read the text of the vows before the notary, erstwhile presidents of the TK, Marshals of the Sejm and the Senate, alternatively of before the president of the Republic of Poland, as provided by law.
The candidates submitted to the Constitutional Court, but president Bogdan Święczkowski informed them that until they made a appropriate vow, they would not take over the duties of the Court's judges. In specified circumstances, another dispute arose from the cycle of who is, and who is not, and as part of this dispute, the failed judges announced legal steps. They were originally expected to file labour lawsuits, which is so unusual that specified a suit can be filed, after the employment relation has been established, and that is most likely why they have not filed lawsuits until today. RPO Marcin Wiązek suggested a much more logical and appropriate legal path, namely bringing a complaint to the administrative court, but failed judges and did not take advantage of this proposal. All these circumstances are highly crucial in the light of the complaint and the ETPCZ ruling.
The European Court of Human Rights with an extraordinary pedantry treats the complaint procedure, it cannot be brought in any another form than through a peculiar form, but, above all, the formal requirements must be met:
(a) Before bringing an action before the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, it is essential to take all available national remedies which may lead to compensation for the consequences of a breach of rights or straight to the removal of those effects.
(b) The time limit for bringing an action before the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg shall be 6 months and shall be calculated from the date of the final decision in the case under appeal.
Source: complaints-etpcz.eu
Complaining to ETPCZ: Krystian Markiewicz, Maciej Taborowski, Marcin Dziurda and Anna Korwin-Piotrowska, they did not fulfil a single formal requirement. That's enough! Not only have they not exhausted national remedies and they have by no means kept the six-month deadline for bringing a complaint, but they have not initiated proceedings in Polish courts at all. In specified a situation, the ETPCZ shall by law reject the complaint and the decision to reject shall be final and shall not be subject to appeal. Therefore, it should be amazing for all citizen that the ETPCZ complaint containing manifest formal deficiencies has been accepted and issued, in addition, a safety ordering the Polish state authorities to let the alleged judges of the Constitutional Tribunal to take up their duties.
After the earlier infringement of the law by the judges themselves, there has been a gross violation of the law by the ETPCZ and not only of formal deficiencies, but besides of the substantive jurisdiction of the tribunal. The ETPCZ deals exclusively with human rights violations, not resolution of competence and constitutional disputes in the associate States. The Ombudsman of the Constitutional Court issued a message which refers precisely to these basic legal criteria and it is certain that the safety will not be executed by the Constitutional Tribunal. It is besides very crucial that the ETPCZ rulings do not alter national decisions. In practice, this means that if a individual convicted in Poland by a final judgement wins the case before the ETPCZ, he will inactive be a criminal, and the only consequence of the ETPCZ judgement is the financial punishment imposed on the state violating the Convention of Human Rights. After the curiosal "marriage", the president of the Republic of Poland applied to the Constitutional Tribunal to settle the competency dispute and it would be in force in Poland.
The saddest thing, however, is that no Polish and European citizens can number on specified “flexibility” and politicised overzealousness of the ETPCZ, erstwhile examining a complaint.
]]>https://www.views.pl/ordinary-citizen-even-not-should-marks-about-such-issue-eptcz/]]>
