Polish Prime Minister Shows Little Respect For Poland's Constitutional Process
Classified Polnews
Poland's Constitutional Tribunal ruling that it is unconstitutional to remove the mandates of democratically elected officials for failure to file a financial statement on time is not what the Polish Prime Minister wanted to hear.
Poland's
Constitutional Court
Constitutions protect the people from overreaching governments. And constitutional courts are supposed to render a non-political judgement on matters brought before it.
In the instant case, which is being hailed by some in Poland as a victory for the Polish Consitutional process, Kaczynski's view of the constitutional process is quite interesting. See Wyrok Trybunalu to triumf Konstytucji
In question was the election law, passed with the intention of fighting corruption, that requires the filing of financial statements of an elected official and spouse within a 30 day time frame. If a statement is not filed, the mandate to govern can be lost. The provisions of the law are, of course, more complex than presented here, but what is here is enough for the purpose of this discussion.
On the facts of the case with Hanna Gronkiewicz-Walcz, she, as the democratically elected President of Warsaw, filed her husband's financial statement 10 hours late.
Kaczynski claimed that a the time she was late, she lost her mandate to govern and that he had the right to install an Administrator to run the City. He effectively overturned the election results.
In defense of her position, prior to the Court ruling, Gronkiewicz-Walcz, a law professor, wrote that she knew the legal principles on which the Court would base its opinion.
Kaczynski reacted by saying that it appeared from her writing that Gronkiewicz-Walcz had some information line directly from the court and that this strengthened the argument that the rules governing the Court must be made. Those changes require a change to the Constitution.
He said that the law was clear and that he hoped the Court would rule based on legal principles and not circus tricks. See Video in Polish
The Court did not appear to perform any circus tricks and it did not get into issues of clarity of the law. It simply said the law was not constitutional.
It said, among other things, that the punishment is too severe for the crime.
That seems logical. For were that not the case, one could pass a law saying that the mandate to govern could be lost if one did not keep his car clean.
It would seem that implying that the Constitutional Tribunal is using circus tricks in its decision making process is not what one would expect of a prime minister. And his further comments indicating that he wants to have the Polish Constitution changed to keep them in line with his way of thinking is not settling to some people.
Gronkiewicz-Walcz said that it is not that the Prime Minister's words are flesh. The Court does not only read the law. It thinks about it. It is not only what the law says, but what it means and what is its intent.
The Court ruled and that it had the opportunity to rule is a victory for democracy. That should command respect even if the Prime Minister does not like the ruling.
