In the discussion on “Rzeczpospolita” (Maciej Gutowski and Piotr Kardas, “It is not glorious intentions that are the basis of judicial decisions”, 23 January 2026, Piotr Mgłosiek, “Anarchy in the strategy already exists”, 26 January 2026, Andrzej Oleś, “The courts active in the fight for power and its profits”, 28 January 2026, Maciej Gutowski and Piotr Kardas, “The effects of non-existence of judgments like avalanches”, 2 February 2026), about the causes and consequences of the designation of judgments as unavoidable, I would like to add any comments from the position of the old justice of the SN.
Cases of denial of the effectiveness of the rulings issued by the alleged neo jurisprudences have late been more widely publicised, but in practice they occurred immediately after the 2017 "jump on justice" which would not have had a chance of success if it were not for the support of those who saw it as the only and possibly unique chance to make their career. Since the chance has been used, it is clear that they will support those who created it and warrant that the minute will last. The bold admission that the way in which SN positions were held caused by this kind of dependence (video: interviews by Małgorzata Manowska in connection with the 2025 elections and their results) deserves respect.
Without calling into question the existence of judgments given in the ultimate Court in the compositions of persons who took office of judges of that Court on the basis of Neo-CRS Resolutions 330/2018 and 331/2018, there would not have been a judgement of 4 September 2025, C-225/22.
Failure to nominate
The Court of Justice of the European Union acknowledged this assessment of the degree of flaw in the nomination procedures to the ultimate Court and its consequences, for which the Court of Appeals in Krakow spoke in the question submitted to him. He found it unconvincing that the persons active in proceedings concluded by the Neo-CRS Resolutions No 330/2018 and No 331/2018 did not know in what way the legal and social realities function, which would absolve them of their work for participating in the deformity of the judiciary, with the hope that the President's engagement in this process would correct all the disadvantages of their vocations.
In the margins, it should be noted that the position of those who have submitted their participation in subsequent competitions for the office of judges in the ultimate Court is not any clearer and more indisputable. On the contrary. It is not possible that, following the transfer by the country, the legal community and the courts of disputes in connection with the appointments under the Neo-CRS Resolutions No 330/2018 and No 33/2018, the applicant for participation in the later announced competitions does not know how badly defective the procedure is and how closely they bind their expected position to those representatives of the legislative and executive authority who warrant its indisputability. And due to the fact that it would be contested, it was obvious.
If something in the discourse on the existence or non-existence of judgments of persons who took over the offices of judges of the ultimate Court in a faulty procedure is not surprising, then the position of the TEU and the 7 judges of the SN Labour Chamber expressed in the resolution of 24 September 2025, III PZP 1/25, but statements by the acting president of the IP of justice Agnieszka Góra-Błaszczykowska (intelligence in the "Rzeczpospolita" of 26 January 2026), that "old judges ruled against the rules". It is hard to believe that a individual with a technological title, referring to a 27-year experience in the judiciary, may ignore the fact that the obligations of a State derived from Article 19 in conjunction with Article 2 of the EU Treaty, Article 47 of the NCP and explained in the case-law of the TEU, require that the explanation of the law made by the TEU be respected, alternatively than hiding for the amusement of the TK.
One more thing needs to be noted. The more unequivocally and decisively the authorities of global legal protection talk of the flaws in the filling of judges' positions in the ultimate Court and the more serious the consequences of this defect result, the more hysterical are the reactions of those who took positions in the courts in proceedings before the neo-CRS to the identified flaws of judgments handed down with their participation.
Judgmental Excess
Prior to the deformity of the judiciary, a disciplinary action or a judgement was put at hazard by the justice whose actions caused the proceedings to be invalid. This was all the more actual of the judge, who would origin this defect consciously and intentionally. Currently, these sanctions, initiated by those defending their defective positions, are intended to contact on judges who have declared nullity of proceedings and have revealed its reasons (video: provision in case III CZ 273/24). The Court of Justice finds that the composition of the ruling SN is intended to lead to the recovery of the situation of the parties covered by the judgement of the composition of the SN, the legal assessment of which is made in the judgement of the CEU C-225/22 (video: judgement in Case II CSKP 2339/22/), but is not specified excess of the judgement in the SN, based on the views which competition the binding case law of the global legal protection authorities for the sole intent of protecting their own positions, regardless of the consequences for the State and the parties to the proceedings.
One more thing, since justice Agnieszka Góra-Błaszczyńska claims that the State pays ‘appropriate amounts’ for the jurisprudence of neo jurisprudence in the SN, due to the fact that he wants to express what is expressed by the conclusion of settlements on this subject before an ETPC ruling occurs, the State should conclude contracts with those whose activity creates those disputes, and declare that it will cease to conclude settlements in connection with their activity, and they will commit themselves to covering the expenses incurred by the State for damages and costs of proceedings.
It seems that this is the only way to verify whether the State pays for neo-Judges in SN ‘because it likes’, or due to the fact that it has to, but besides to verify that the amount of compensation granted is actually lower than that of the ECHR. There is no another anticipation of convincing not only the public but besides those who should search the office of SN justice in competitions before the decently cast KRS that it is time to reconstruct the regulation of law in this court.
In a joint resolution issued six years ago, The chambers of the SN identified the effects of disregarding the violations of the law that occurred in connection with the constitutional “attack” of power on the KRS, the SN (NSA) and the filling of positions in the general courts. The resolution expressed a compromise position and set limits to the compromise. Those liable for its implementation have ostentatically disregarded it, as I callback today's regrettable deficiency of compromise.
Eye soap
Any subsequent message by the ECHR and the TEU on the position of neojudges in the SN and on the consequences of not removing infringements in connection with the organisation and operation of the judiciary went further than the view expressed in the resolution.
It is clear from the Courts that the only intent of those who have devastated the judiciary is to keep the position quo, and the caricature procedure of the alleged impartiality test was introduced solely to blind the observers of the situation in the country and to give the impression that we have entered the way of restoring the regulation of law (and deserved the funds from the KPO).
Well, we haven't entered yet, and if there are no draft laws on the KRS and SN prepared by the codification committee, we won't get on it. It is these projects that presume the resolution of the individual situation in the judiciary, while guaranteeing the stableness of judgments issued after 2018, and what is most crucial – fast resolution. Extending this process in time, as the Venice Commission and the Helsinki Human Rights Foundation want, will make us never leave the hell we are in.
We waited 2 years for projects.
The concept of non-existent judgement was referred to by the ECJ in judgement C-225/22 with respect to the ruling of the SN given by persons who took over the offices of the SN judges despite the rebuttal of the resolutions neo-CRS No 330/2018 and No 33/2018, which were the constitutional grounds for the appointment, and their engagement in the examination of the case consisted in examining an extraordinary remedy.
The challenge of the request to rapidly sanitize the situation in the judiciary is in fact threatening that, according to this concept, the case law of average courts will besides be assessed by another common courts. Personally, I uncertainty that those seeking to hinder the adoption of laws to reconstruct the regulation of law will be prepared to take work for the consequences of this attitude.
We waited 2 years for these projects. besides long. The SN authorities utilized these 2 years much better, due to the fact that at that time all administrative functions, not only in the civilian and Criminal Chamber, but besides in the Labour and Social Insurance Chamber, were covered by neo-Judges, for which the reorganisation of the home was an excuse.
The establishment and maintenance of relations between the authorities of the SN with another European courts and tribunals began to be taken care of by the coordinator for global cooperation, and since this fresh function was entrusted to the typical of Poland in the Venice Commission, the efforts of the fresh authorities of the SN put into steps to be credible in the European forum must have resulted.
The author is an SN justice in the civilian Chamber (since 2010), Dr. hab., Prof. UJ in the Department of Administrative Procedure.
