Pozycja sędziego w projekcie konstytucji PiS w perspektywie strasburskiej
[hidepost]
The position of a judge in the PiS-prepared draft of the Constitution from the Strasburg perspective
The article analyses the position of a judge in the draft of the Polish Constitution prepared by the Law and Justice party (PiS) in 2010.Individual regulations of the draft are compared with the currently applicable Constitution of the Polish Republic and confronted with the Strasburg standard presented first of all in the opinions of the Venice Commission. The article discusses in turn: the mechanism of appointing judges, the incompatibilitas principle, the problem of guaranteeing the material status of a judge, irremovability of judges, immunities and disciplinary proceedings, as well as the constitution judicial authority.
Key words: Constitution, judicial independence, Venice Commission
* Autor jest adiunktem na WPiA Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.
1 Tekst został opublikowany w „Obserwator Konstytucyjny”, dostępny na: http://www.obserwatorkonstytucyjny.pl/debaty/pozycja-sedziego-w-projekcie-konstytucji-pis-w-perspektywie-sztrasburskiej/
2 Projekt Prawa i Sprawiedliwości, Konstytucja Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej, styczeń 2010 r., tekst zob.: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2JtpyJv1BeRa29yd2hPMm9xaEU/view?pli=1. Wprawdzie przed wyborami parlamentarnymi w 2015 r. został on „zdjęty” z oficjalnej strony tej partii, niemniej można go nadal znaleźć w Internecie.
3 Europejska Komisja na rzecz Demokracji przez Prawo.
4 CDL-AD(2007)028, Report on Judicial Appointments by the Venice Commission, §§ 2–3, 59, 12–17, 25.
5 CDL-AD(2013)034, Opinion on proposals amending the draft law on the amendments to the constitution to strengthen the independence of judges of Ukraine, § 16; CDL-AD(2013)010, Opinion on the Draft New Constitution of Iceland, § 137.
6 CDL-AD(2013)034, Opinion on proposals amending the draft law on the amendments to the constitution to strengthen the independence of judges of Ukraine, § 16.
7 CDL-AD(2007)028, Report on Judicial Appointments by the Venice Commission, § 14.
8 CDL-AD(2014)021, Opinion on the draft law on introducing amendments and addenda to the judicial code of Armenia (term of Office of Court Presidents), §§ 34, 3.
9 CDL-AD(2005)023, Opinion on the Provisions on the Judiciary in the Draft Constitution of the Republic of Serbia, § 17.
10 CDL-AD(2013)034, Opinion on proposals amending the draft law on the amendments to the constitution to strengthen the independence of judges of Ukraine, § 16.
11 CDL-AD(2005)023, Opinion on the Provisions on the Judiciary in the Draft Constitution of the Republic of Serbia, § 17.
12 CDL-AD(2010)004, Report on the Independence of the Judicial System Part I: The Independence of Judges, § 38.
13 CDL-AD(2003)019, Opinion on three Draft Laws proposing Amendments to the Constitution of Ukraine, § 39.
14 CDL-AD(2005)003, Joint opinion on a proposal for a constitutional law on the changes and amendments to the Constitution of Georgia by Venice Commission and OSCE/ODIHR, § 105.
15 Dz.U. z 1993 r. Nr 61, poz. 284 ze zm.; dalej jako: EKPCz.
16 Wyrok ETPCz z 9.1.2013 r., skarga nr 21722/11, §§ 154–156.
17 CDL-AD(2002)32, Opinion on the Amendments to the Constitution of Liechtenstein proposed by the Princely House of Liechtenstein, § 31.
18 CDL-AD(2007)028, Report on Judicial Appointments by the Venice Commission, §§ 40–43.
19 CDL-AD(2002)033, Opinion on the draft amendments to the Constitution of Kyrgyzstan, § 10.
20 CDL-AD(2010)003, Joint Opinion on the Draft Law on the Judicial System and the Status of Judges of Ukraine by the Venice Commission and the Directorate of Co-operation within the Directorate General of Human Rights and Legal Affairs of the Council of Europe, §§ 39, 46–47.
[/hidepost]