Barejowski's relations with the Polish Senate

A small over 2 months ago, I caused a small bit of a fortunate fuss, describing the election by the Polish legislature of jurors to the ultimate Court – mostly recommended to the legislature by the CODE. president Manowska has just refused to appoint them. Then I asked:

1. What is the point of this operation erstwhile the jurors of the SN were introduced there unconstitutional and considered to be a violation of EU law by the law of Andrzej Duda and in accordance with it they appear exclusively in trio compositions with non-judges, having no chance of affecting the regulation of law of proceedings? Does the legislature have any strategy of a "Trojan horse" here, or does it simply implement the provisions of the Act, reading in it that it has jurors to choose, regardless of its unconstitutionality? What plan does the CODE gotta participate in this operation and proudly signify the choice of candidates it has submitted?
2. Is it time to get up or not to get up? The citizens of the Republic of Poland have so far come to SN meetings only so as not to stand up in a demonstration erstwhile a non-court enters the hall. What description should apply now? In these questions, of course, there is an assessment: the choice of jurors does not service anything but legitimizes unconstitutional written rules.
3. Why did the CODE decide to take part in this without consulting another social and legal organisations involved, at least in the Agreement for the regulation of Law?

The jurors were to start work from the beginning of this year. They won't. They're not sworn in, Manowska won't set them up. Instead, she wrote to the legislature and the Grodzki Marshal about the reassumption of choice. As is understood by the explanations of the SN spokesman, the reason is that the jurors recommended by the CODE do not give the required law the "indiscriminate character" ...

I am writing about this, of course, in relation to my own legislature candidacy, due to the fact that it is in this – attention, subjective! – evaluation of oppositionists forming the majority in the Senate. For example, what does it say about the regulation of law? The same legislature has late dealt with amendments to another Duda law, which allegedly was to resolve the dispute over the regulation of law with the institutions and tribunals of the European Union. The law – even amended by the legislature – of course does not meet EU standards. The same legislature – contrary to the agreement on this substance – did not come up with its own draft repeating the provisions and solutions supported by organisations concentrated in the Agreement for the regulation of Law. Instead, he passed his own draft law on the KRS – curiosal in a consistent opinion of legal organizations and “spiritual spirits”. What is it? And what was that about choosing jurors?

We didn't know the answers to those questions. We don't think we're going to get to know them, the media won't ask, and the politicians even asked don't think dialog is their responsibility. Fortunately, present it turns out that PiS and Manowska on the issue of principles can always be counted – as, without trying on, erstwhile a militia during Orange alternate happenings. It was possible to go out on the street with a large image of Lenin, and the militia rolled reliably – to entertain the amazed audience. Manowska is likewise adding the point to the dubious script of legislature politics today. I'm starting to realize why Major Fydry likes the current power.