The Constitutional Court of Poland puts limits on the EU: its ruling K 3/21 says this

@ElentirENG ES 10·07·2021 · 22:18 0

Two of the basic pillars of liberal democracy, of which Poland was one of the pioneers in Europe, are national sovereignty and the limited state.

Hungary and Poland yes, Spain no: the reasons for the leftist bias of the European Commission
Aberrant EU resolution to force Poland to promote sex and abortion among children

The EU is betraying the founding spirit of the European Community

Betraying the founding spirit of the European Economic Community, the European Union has been expanding more and more, openly invading the national sovereignty of its member countries and creating conflicts between the dictates and ideological agendas of the community bodies, on the one hand, and the fundamental laws of the Nations that make up the Union. Today the Constitutional Court of Poland (TK) has published a historic ruling, K 3/21, which puts a stop to this political expansionism of the EU, recalling the primacy of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland over those aspects of European treaties that threaten the national sovereignty of the Polish people.

The Polish Constitutional Court denounces the invasion of national sovereignty by the EU

The ruling indicates that certain points of the Treaty of the European Union are incompatible with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland insofar as it opens a new stage in which "the organs of the European Union operate outside the limits of the powers conferred by the Republic of Poland in treaties," in a framework in which "the Constitution is not the supreme law of the Republic of Poland", and therefore, this Republic "cannot function as a sovereign and democratic state." The ruling also points out the incompatibility of Article 19 of the EU Treaty with the Polish Constitution, in that it gives national courts the power to omit provisions of the Constitution. The TK's decision was taken by a majority of 10 judges to 2.

A clear challenge from Poland to the authoritarian drift of the EU leadership

This decision of the TK represents a clear challenge to the UE institutions that are invading national sovereignty not only in relation to the Polish Judiciary, but also to fundamental rights of the citizens of Poland, such as the right to life and freedom of education, threatened by aberrant EU resolutions imposing abortion and gender ideology on the Polish people. For my part, I can do nothing but celebrate that Poland is putting limits on the absolutism of Brussels, which is on its way to turning the EU into something more and more like the former Soviet Union.

The translation of judgment K 3/21 into English

The ruling can be read on the TK website, by clicking here. For its interest, I offer below the English translation:

Assessment of compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland of selected provisions of the Treaty on European Union

JUDGMENT DECISION OF THE COURT IN THE NAME OF THE REPUBLIC OF POLAND

Warsaw, October 7, 2021

The Constitutional Tribunal composed of:

Julia Przyłębska - chairman
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski
Mariusz Muszyński
Krystyna Pawłowicz
Stanisław Piotrowicz
Justyn Piskorski
Piotr Pszczółkowski
Bartłomiej Sochański - rapporteur
Michał Warciński
Rafał Wojciechowski
Jaroslaw Wyrembak
Andrzej Zielonacki,

recording clerk: Grażyna Szałygo, Krzysztof

Recommended

after examining, with the participation of the applicant and the President of the Republic of Poland, the Sejm, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Public Prosecutor General and the Ombudsman, at the hearing on July 13, August 31, September 22 and 30 and October 7, 2021, the request of the Prime Minister to compliance testing:

1) art. 1, first and second subparagraphs in conjunction with Art. 4 sec. 3 of the Treaty on European Union (Journal of Laws of 2004, No. 90, item 864/30, as amended), understood as authorizing or obliging the authority applying the right to withdraw from the application of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland or order to apply the provisions of law in a manner inconsistent with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, with Art. 2, art. 7, art. 8 sec. 1 in connection with Art. 8 sec. 2, art. 90 sec. 1 and art. 91 paragraph. 2 and art. 178 sec. 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland,

2) art. 19 paragraph 1, second paragraph in conjunction with Art. 4 sec. 3 of the treaty referred to in point 1, understood in the way that due to the provision of effective legal protection, the authority applying the law is entitled or obliged to apply the provisions of law in a manner inconsistent with the Constitution, including the use of a provision which, pursuant to a judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal, has lost its binding force as inconsistent with the Basic Law, with Art. 2, art. 7, art. 8 sec. 1 in connection with Art. 8 sec. 2 and art. 91 paragraph. 2, art. 90 sec. 1, art. 178 sec. 1 and art. 190 paragraph. 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland,

3) art. 19 paragraph 1, second paragraph in conjunction with Art. 2 of the treaty referred to in point 1, understood as authorizing the court to inspect the independence of judges appointed by the President of the Republic of Poland and to review the resolution of the National Council of the Judiciary on requesting the President of the Republic of Poland to appoint a judge, pursuant to Art. 8 sec. 1 in connection with Art. 8 sec. 2, art. 90 sec. 1 and art. 91 paragraph. 2, art. 144 sec. 3 paragraph 17 and article. 186 paragraph 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland,

Rules:

1. Art. 1, first and second paragraphs in conjunction with Art. 4 sec. 3 of the Treaty on European Union (Journal of Laws of 2004, No. 90, item 864/30, as amended) to the extent to which the European Union was established by equal and sovereign states, creating an "ever closer union between the peoples of Europe" whose integration - taking place on the basis of EU law and through its interpretation by the Court of Justice of the European Union - reaches a "new stage" in which:

a) the bodies of the European Union operate outside the limits of powers conferred by the Republic of Poland in treaties,
b) the Constitution is not the highest law of the Republic of Poland, having priority of validity and application,
c) The Republic of Poland cannot function as a sovereign and democratic state
- is inconsistent with Art. 2, art. 8 and art. 90 sec. 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland.

2. Art. 19 sec. 1, second paragraph of the Treaty on European Union, in so far as - in order to ensure effective legal protection in areas covered by EU law - grants national courts (common courts, administrative courts, military courts and the Supreme Court) the power to:
a) omitting the provisions of the Constitution in the adjudication process is inconsistent with Art. 2, art. 7, art. 8 sec. 1, art. 90 sec. 1 and art. 178 sec. 1 of the Constitution,
b) adjudication on the basis of non-binding provisions, repealed by the Sejm or recognized by the Constitutional Tribunal as inconsistent with the Constitution, is inconsistent with Art. 2, art. 7 and art. 8 sec. 1, art. 90 sec. 1, art. 178 sec. 1 and art. 190 paragraph. 1 of the Constitution.

3. Art. 19 sec. 1, second paragraph and Art. 2 of the Treaty on European Union to the extent that - in order to ensure effective legal protection in areas covered by EU law and to ensure judicial independence - they grant national courts (common courts, administrative courts, military courts and the Supreme Court) the power to:
a) control of the legality of the procedure of appointing a judge, including the examination of the legality of the act of appointment of a judge by the President of the Republic of Poland, are inconsistent with Art. 2, art. 8 sec. 1, art. 90 sec. 1 and art. 179 in connection with Art. 144 sec. 3 point 17 of the Constitution,
b) controlling the legality of a resolution of the National Council of the Judiciary containing a request to the President to appoint a judge is inconsistent with Art. 2, art. 8 sec. 1, art. 90 sec. 1 and art. 186 paragraph 1 of the Constitution,
c) finding by the national court that the process of nominating a judge was defective and, consequently, refusing to recognize a person appointed to the office of judge as a judge pursuant to Art. 179 of the Constitution, are inconsistent with Art. 2, art. 8 sec. 1, art. 90 sec. 1 and art. 179 in connection with Art. 144 sec. 3 point 17 of the Constitution.

In addition, it provides:

discontinue the proceedings as to the remainder.

The decision was made by a majority of votes.

Julia Przyłębska
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski
Mariusz Muszyński
Krystyna Pawłowicz
Stanisław Piotrowicz
Justyn Piskorski
Piotr Pszczółkowski (separate opinion)
Bartłomiej Sochański
Michał Warciński
Rafał Wojciechowski
Jarosław Wyrembak (votum separatum)
Andrzej Zielonacki