Ruled by Law

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Ruled by Law RULED BY LAW THREATS TO THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN POLAND IN 2015-2019 RULED BY LAW THREATS TO THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN POLAND IN 2015-2019 Authors Małgorzata Szuleka, Marcin Wolny in cooperation with Maciej Kalisz Our thanks go to Danuta Przywara, Maciej Nowicki, Dr Piotr Kładoczny, Dr Barbara Grabowska-Moroz, Jarosław Jagura, Konrad Siemaszko, Patryk Wachowiec and Daniel Witko for their assistance and comments on the first versions of this report. Graphic design and layout Marta Borucka Cover photo Jan Kolar / unsplash Edition I Publication available under the Creative Commons license. Acknowledgment of authorship under the same conditions 4.0 (CC BY-SA 4.0) Legal status: 15th September 2019 Publisher Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights ul. Zgoda 11 00-018 Warszawa CONTENTS Introduction ............................................................................... 5 Summary of events in the years 2015–2019 ........................................ 7 The parliamentary elections in October, 2015 .............................................. 7 Information on the most important systemic changes ...................................... 8 The shrinking space for human rights ...................................................... 9 Calendar of changes .......................................................................10 A crisis in the rule of law – attacks on the judiciary ...............................13 Changes in the Constitutional Tribunal ...................................................13 Changes to the Supreme Court ............................................................22 Changes in the common courts ............................................................27 Changes in the National Council of the Judiciary of Poland ...............................33 Independent institutions ...............................................................45 Commissioner for Human Rights .........................................................45 Public media...............................................................................50 Non-governmental organisations ..........................................................55 The shrinking space for human rights ...............................................63 Freedom of assembly ......................................................................63 Freedom of expression .....................................................................69 Women’s rights ............................................................................74 LGBTQI rights ............................................................................78 The rights of foreign nationals .............................................................80 Human rights and security ................................................................84 Dispute with the European Union ....................................................91 Summary ..................................................................................99 List of the most important legal acts adopted in 2015-2019: ............................ 101 INTRODUCTION The years 2015-2019 were a period in which the greatest rollback in human rights pro- tection since 1989 has been recorded in Poland. The ruling majority, despite the lack of a sufficient number of votes to amend the Constitution, has introduced a number of changes to the state system, thereby putting at risk the protection of the rule of law and the principle of tripartite governance. By aligning legislation with political objectives, the rule of law, which is at the heart of democratic systems, has been replaced by rule using the law. The Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights has been monitoring respect of human rights in Poland since 1989. Despite numerous difficulties and complex problems, up to 2015 we observed a gradual increase in the protection of individual rights and freedoms and an improvement in the functioning of the system for the protection of human rights. This slow improvement has ceased with the attacks on the foundations of a democratic state. The challenges addressed so far by human rights organisations (including access to the judicial system, the right to a fair trial and the rights of minor- ities and vulnerable groups) have been compounded by the need to protect the rule of law and the principles of the democratic rule of law. The fundamental changes in the state have not left the system for the protection of human rights unaffected. Its independence and functioning have been undermined, among others, by changes in the functioning of the Constitutional Tribunal, the Supreme Court, the common courts and the office of public prosecutor. In addition, the situation was aggravated by attempts to limit the independence of the Commissioner for Human Rights and the subordination of public media to the ruling majority. This report documents the most important aspects in the breakdown of the system for the protection of human rights. The report is not exhaustive and does not constitute any kind of chronicle on the rule of the Law and Justice party. The report focuses pri- marily on institutions and issues of key importance to human rights, in which we have seen the greatest rollback over the last four years – primarily the judiciary, the activities of independent institutions (the Commissioner for Human Rights, the media and social organisations), the protection of key freedoms and human rights, and Poland’s relations with the European Union. An urgent improvement of the situation in these areas is crucial for maintaining the entire democratic system in Poland. SUMMARY OF EVENTS IN THE YEARS 2015–2019 THE PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS IN OCTOBER, 2015 In October, 2015, the parliamentary elec- tions were won by the Law and Justice party with 37.5% of votes, which in turn translated 37,5% into 235 seats in the Sejm (support of 39.9% in the elections to the Senate translated into 66 seats in the Senate). This was the first time in the history of elections after 1989, when a single party won the majority of votes in parliament and could rule independently. Despite the fact that the majority achieved did not allow for a change in the constitution, the ruling majority initiated the process of amending key legal acts concerning the most important institutions in the state al- most immediately after taking power. Thus, de facto, without changing the constitution, the state sys- tem was changed and the pro- tection of the rule of law and the separation of powers was 235 undermined. 8 RULED BY LAW INFORMATION ON THE MOST IMPORTANT SYSTEMIC CHANGES Institution Description Status Commissioner for ■ A decrease in the budget for the office of ■ Independent. Human Rights Commissioner for Human Rights. ■ The term of office for the ■ Amendments to the act on immunity, current Commissioner for including the Commissioner for Human Human Rights ends in 2020. Rights. ■ Attacks in public debates Supreme Court ■ Attempts to reduce the retirement age of ■ Independent of political will. Supreme Court judges. ■ Doubts about the legality of ■ The creation of two new Supreme Court the decisions taken by the Chambers. judges sitting in the new ■ Attacks on the First President of the Supreme Supreme Court Chambers. Court and other Supreme Court judges. Common courts ■ Changes in the procedure for appointing ■ Independent of political will, and dismissing presidents of courts. despite emerging examples of ■ Amendments to the rules on disciplinary a chilling effect. proceedings against judges. ■ Media attacks on individual judges. ■ Introduction of a system for the random allocation of cases. Constitutional ■ Six acts of legislation or amendments ■ Partially dependent on Tribunal changing the mode of operation of the political will. Constitutional Tribunal and the procedure ■ Doubts as to the legality of de- for electing a new Constitutional Tribunal cisions issued by judges chosen President. without a valid legal basis. Public Prosecutor’s ■ Merger of the functions of the Prosecutor ■ Significantly dependent on Office General with the Minister of Justice giving political will. the Prosecutor General broad powers to influence the course of investigations. National Council ■ Amendment of the act on the National ■ Dependent on political will. of the Judiciary of Council of the Judiciary of Poland and ■ Doubts about the legitimacy Poland change in the manner of appointing of the NCJ’s activities in its member-judges of the National Council of current form. the Judiciary. Public media ■ Changes in the procedure for appointing ■ Dependent on political will. and dismissing members of management and supervisory boards of public radio and television. SUMMARY OF EVENTS IN THE YEARS 2015–2019 9 THE SHRINKING SPACE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS Constitution Detailed description of the violations in 2015–2019 Article 32 – Everyone is equal before the law → LGBTQI rights, p. 78 [...] no one shall be discriminated against. Article 33 – Men and women in the Republic of Poland have equal rights in → Women’s rights, p. 74 family, political, social and economic life. Article 40 – No one shall be subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading → Police violence, p. 87 treatment. Article 45 – Everyone has the right to a fair and public hearing without undue → A crisis in the rule of law – attacks on delay by a competent, autonomous, the judiciary, p. 13 impartial and independent court. Article 47 – Everyone has the right to the → Security and the right to privacy, p. 88 protection of privacy. Article 54 – Everyone
Recommended publications
  • Implementation of the Helsinki Accords Hearings
    BASKET III: IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HELSINKI ACCORDS HEARINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE NINETY-SEVENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION THE CRISIS IN POLAND AND ITS EFFECTS ON THE HELSINKI PROCESS DECEMBER 28, 1981 Printed for the use of the - Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 9-952 0 'WASHINGTON: 1982 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE DANTE B. FASCELL, Florida, Chairman ROBERT DOLE, Kansas, Cochairman ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah SIDNEY R. YATES, Illinois JOHN HEINZ, Pennsylvania JONATHAN B. BINGHAM, New York ALFONSE M. D'AMATO, New York TIMOTHY E. WIRTH, Colorado CLAIBORNE PELL, Rhode Island MILLICENT FENWICK, New Jersey PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont DON RITTER, Pennsylvania EXECUTIVE BRANCH The Honorable STEPHEN E. PALMER, Jr., Department of State The Honorable RICHARD NORMAN PERLE, Department of Defense The Honorable WILLIAM H. MORRIS, Jr., Department of Commerce R. SPENCER OLIVER, Staff Director LYNNE DAVIDSON, Staff Assistant BARBARA BLACKBURN, Administrative Assistant DEBORAH BURNS, Coordinator (II) ] CONTENTS IMPLEMENTATION. OF THE HELSINKI ACCORDS The Crisis In Poland And Its Effects On The Helsinki Process, December 28, 1981 WITNESSES Page Rurarz, Ambassador Zdzislaw, former Polish Ambassador to Japan .................... 10 Kampelman, Ambassador Max M., Chairman, U.S. Delegation to the CSCE Review Meeting in Madrid ............................................................ 31 Baranczak, Stanislaw, founder of KOR, the Committee for the Defense of Workers.......................................................................................................................... 47 Scanlan, John D., Deputy Assistant Secretary for European Affairs, Depart- ment of State ............................................................ 53 Kahn, Tom, assistant to the president of the AFL-CIO ..........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Think Tanks and Governments. Country Report. Poland
    “Legal Think Tanks and government – capacity building”: project supported by the International Visegrad Fund www.visegradfund.org Project partners: POLAND HUNGARY Legal Think Tanks and Government CZECH REPUBLIC – Capacity Building Country Report. Poland SLOVAKIA UKRAINE Authors Łukasz BOJARSKI Grzegorz WIADEREK MOLDOVA 1 Authors of the study Łukasz BOJARSKI President and co-founder of INPRIS, lawyer. Co-founder and Chairman of the Board of the Polish Legal Clinics Foundation (FUPP). Expert of Polish and international institutions (including European Commission, OSCE, Council of Europe, academia, private foundations including Stefan Batory Foundation, Open Society Institute). Member of the Editorial Board of the „National Judicial Council. Quarterly” (http://www.krs.pl/pl/kwartalnik-krs). Before: Member of the National Council of the Judiciary of Poland, (2010-2015). Member of the Board of Directors of PILnet – The Global Network for Public Interest Law (2008-2016). Employee of the Helsinki Foundation of Human Rights in the years 1998-2010. Member of the Experts Council of the „Citizen and the Law” (Obywatel i Prawo) program of the Polish- American Freedom Foundation (2005-2013), Member of the Committee on the Efficiency of Justice in the Ministry of Justice. Fields of interest: judiciary, legal services, legal profession, legal education, non- discrimination, human rights. Author of the reform proposals on the access to legal aid and the legal profession. Author of numerous publications on the judiciary, access to justice and interactive innovative methods in legal education, see list of main publications. Contact: lukasz.bojarski at inpris.pl Grzegorz WIADEREK Co-founder of INPRIS and member of the Management Board, lawyer.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Judicial Reform in Ukraine and in Poland: Onstitutional and European Legal Aspect in the Context of Independent Judiciary
    RESEARCH ARTICLES CURRENT JUDICIAL REFORM IN UKRAINE AND IN POLAND: ONSTITUTIONAL AND EUROPEAN LEGAL ASPECT IN THE CONTEXT OF INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY Grzegorz Borkowski, Doctor of Law, Judge seconded to the Regional Court Warszawa-Praga, former Head of Office of the National Council of Judiciary (Poland) Olga Sovgyria, Doctor of Science (Law), professor of the Department of Constitutional Law, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv (Kyiv, Ukraine) https://doi.org/10.33327/AJEE-18-2.3-a000011 Summary: 1. Introduction. – 2. The Judicial System of Poland at the Present Stage. – 2.1. Constitutional Tribunal. – 2.1.1. Composition of the Constitutional Tribunal. – 2.1.2. Refusal of Publication of Certain Judgments of the Constitutional Tribunal. – 2.2. The Common Courts System. – 2.2.1. Merger of the Functions of Minister of Justice and Prosecutor General and its Consequences. – 2.2.2. Court directors. – 2.2.3. Random Allocation of Cases. – 2.2.4. Judicial Appointments. – 2.2.5. Secondment of Judges. – 2.2.6. Appointment and Dismissal of Court Presidents. – 2.3. Supreme Court. – 2.3.1. Extraordinary Complaint (Article 86). – 2.3.2. Changes in the Structure of the Supreme Court. – 2.3.3. Lay Judges. – 2.3.4. Changes in Disciplinary Proceedings in Respect of the SC and the Common Judiciary. – 2.4. National Council for Judiciary. – 2.4.1. Entrusting the Sejm with the Competence to Elect the Members of the Council. – 2.4.2 Termination of Office of the Current Members of the Council. – 3. Judicial Reform in Ukraine in 2016: Problems of Implementation. – 3.1. General Characteristics of the Judiciary in Ukraine.
    [Show full text]
  • Anti-Discrimination Education: We Shall Not Give Up! Advocacy in Times
    Anti-discrimination education: We shall not give up! Advocacy in times of rise of hateful rhetoric, shrinking civic space and erosion of democratic standards in Poland October 2019 1 Executive summary This report is addressed to civil society activists, decision makers in international institutions and funders interested in supporting advocacy for the anti-discrimination education in the context of shrinking civic space and political backlash. It presents key findings from the research conducted by The Anti-Discrimination Education Society (TEA) on the space for education-focused and rights- based advocacy after the right-wing conservative Law and Justice Party (PiS) took power in Poland in the general elections of 2015. Since that time, Poland has seen systematic and strategic efforts to undermine human rights and the rule of law, introduction of regressive laws and policy measures to reinforce traditional gender roles, scapegoating migrants, refugees and LGBTQI communities, and a rising tide of hate and discrimination. Consequently, the civic space for human rights activists and anti-discrimination educators has drastically shrunken and the rights they promote and uphold are under concerted attack. The Law and Justice Party’s rule has provoked a rise of a massive opposition in the streets, whilst civil society advocates have started exploring and/or developing new strategies and new approaches. For example: • Advocacy at a local level with local governments, which are in opposition to the Law and Justice Party and state their support
    [Show full text]
  • Druk Nr 1037 Warszawa, 28 Grudnia 2012 R
    Druk nr 1037 Warszawa, 28 grudnia 2012 r. SEJM RZECZYPOSPOLITEJ POLSKIEJ VII kadencja Pani Ewa Kopacz Marszałek Sejmu Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej Na podstawie art. 33 regulaminu Sejmu niżej podpisani posłowie wnoszą projekt uchwały: - wzywającej wszystkie władze publiczne do podejmowania konkretnych działań w obronie życia i zdrowia nienarodzonych dzieci poczętych in vitro. Do reprezentowania wnioskodawców w pracach nad projektem uchwały upoważniamy panią poseł Elżbietę Rafalską. (-) Adam Abramowicz; (-) Andrzej Adamczyk; (-) Dorota Arciszewska- Mielewczyk; (-) Jan Krzysztof Ardanowski; (-) Iwona Ewa Arent; (-) Marek Ast; (-) Piotr Babinetz; (-) Barbara Bartuś; (-) Dariusz Bąk; (-) Włodzimierz Bernacki; (-) Andrzej Bętkowski; (-) Barbara Bubula; (-) Witold Czarnecki; (-) Arkadiusz Czartoryski; (-) Edward Czesak; (-) Andrzej Dąbrowski; (-) Zbigniew Dolata; (-) Jan Dziedziczak; (-) Tadeusz Dziuba; (-) Jacek Falfus; (-) Anna Fotyga; (-) Zbigniew Girzyński; (-) Szymon Giżyński; (-) Artur Górski; (-) Czesław Hoc; (-) Józefa Hrynkiewicz; (-) Michał Jach; (-) Dawid Jackiewicz; (-) Wiesław Stanisław Janczyk; (-) Andrzej Jaworski; (-) Mariusz Orion Jędrysek; (-) Krzysztof Jurgiel; (-) Tomasz Kaczmarek; (-) Izabela Kloc; (-) Sławomir Kłosowski; (-) Henryk Kowalczyk; (-) Bartosz Kownacki; (-) Leonard Krasulski; (-) Zbigniew Kuźmiuk; (-) Adam Kwiatkowski; (-) Tomasz Latos; (-) Krzysztof Lipiec; (-) Maciej Łopiński; (-) Ewa Malik; (-) Maciej Małecki; (-) Gabriela Masłowska; (-) Jerzy Materna; (-) Grzegorz Matusiak; (-) Marek Matuszewski; (-) Kazimierz
    [Show full text]
  • Studia Iuridica 2015/60. Collective Labour
    COLLECTIVE LABOUR LAW Studia Iuridica tom 60 COLLECTIVE LABOUR LAW logo WUW.inddWarszawa 1 20155/12/2014 12:54:19 PM Rada Programowa Grażyna Bałtruszajtys (przewodnicząca), Jan Błeszyński, Zdzisław Galicki, Hubert Izdebski, Jacek Lang, Maria Rogacka-Rzewnicka, Marek Wąsowicz, Beata Janiszewska (sekretarz) Członkowie Rady Programowej afiliowani za granicą Marc Bors (Uniwersytet we Fribourgu), Michael Martinek (Uniwersytet w Saarbrücken), Alessandro Somma (Uniwersytet w Ferrarze), Elena V. Timoshina (Uniwersytet w Sankt Petersburgu) Redaktorzy naukowi tomu Łukasz Pisarczyk Jakub Stelina Recenzenci „Studia Iuridica” w 2015 r. Francisco Javier Andrés Santos, Wojciech Dajczak, Włodzimierz Kamyszanskij, Luz Maria Martinez Velencoso, Andriej Łusznikow, Bronisław Sitek, Jakob Fortunat Stagl Redaktor naczelny Tomasz Giaro Redaktor tematyczny Łukasz Pisarczyk Redaktor językowy Radosław Pawelec Sekretarz Redakcji Adam Niewiadomski Projekt okładki i stron tytułowych Jakub Rakusa-Suszczewski Redaktor prowadzący Dorota Dziedzic Redaktor Krystyna Dziewanowska-Stefańczyk Opracowanie redakcyjne streszczeń anglojęzycznych Robert Stępień ISSN 0137-4346 ISBN 978-83-235-1932-4 © Copyright by Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego 2015 Wersją pierwotną czasopisma jest wersja drukowana. „Studia Iuridica” znajdują się w wykazie czasopism punktowanych przez Ministerstwo Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego na potrzeby oceny parametrycznej jednostek naukowych. Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego 00-497 Warszawa, ul. Nowy Świat 4 www.wuw.pl; e-mail: [email protected] Dział
    [Show full text]
  • Of the Human Rights Situation of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex People in Europe and Central Asia
    OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION OF LESBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, TRANS AND INTERSEX PEOPLE IN EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA FIND THIS REPORT ONLINE: WWW.ILGA-EUROPE.ORG THIS REVIEW COVERS THE PERIOD OF JANUARY TO DECEMBER 2019. Rue du Trône/Troonstraat 60 Brussels B-1050 Belgium Tel.: +32 2 609 54 10 Fax: + 32 2 609 54 19 [email protected] www.ilga-europe.org Design & layout: Maque Studio, www.maque.it ISBN 978-92-95066-11-3 FIND THIS REPORT ONLINE: WWW.ILGA-EUROPE.ORG Co-funded by the Rights Equality and Citizenship (REC) programme 2014-2020 of the European Union This publication has been produced with the financial support of the Rights Equality and Citizenship (REC) programme 2014-2020 of the European Union. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of ILGA-Europe and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Commission. ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION OF LESBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, TRANS, AND INTERSEX PEOPLE COVERING THE PERIOD OF JANUARY TO DECEMBER 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS KAZAKHSTAN INTRODUCTION KOSOVO* A NOTE ON DATA COLLECTION AND PRESENTATION KYRGYZSTAN HIGHLIGHTS, KEY DEVELOPMENTS AND TRENDS LATVIA INSTITUTIONAL REVIEWS LIECHTENSTEIN LITHUANIA EUROPEAN UNION LUXEMBOURG UNITED NATIONS MALTA COUNCIL OF EUROPE MOLDOVA ORGANISATION FOR SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE MONACO MONTENEGRO COUNTRY REVIEWS NETHERLANDS ALBANIA NORTH MACEDONIA ANDORRA NORWAY A ARMENIA POLAND AUSTRIA PORTUGAL AZERBAIJAN ROMANIA BELARUS RUSSIA BELGIUM SAN MARINO BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA SERBIA BULGARIA SLOVAKIA
    [Show full text]
  • Przegląd Więziennictwa Polskiego
    PRZEGLĄD WIĘZIENNICTWA POLSKIEGO Kwartalnik poświęcony zagadnieniom prawnym, kryminologicznym i penitencjarnym Nr 96 Warszawa 2017 III kwartał 2017 Wydawnictwo Centralnego Zarządu Służby Więziennej Ministerstwa Sprawiedliwości Rada Naukowa: Przewodniczący − Czesław Kłak Wiceprzewodniczący − Krzysztof Wiak Członkowie: Krzysztof Krajewski, Emil Pływaczewski, Edward Skrętowicz, Jerzy Migdał, Beata Pastwa-Wojciechowska, Teodor Szymanowski, Stefan Lelental, Brunon Hołyst, Lech K. Paprzycki, Grażyna Szczygieł, Kazimiera Juszka, Barbara Stańdo-Kawecka, Ryszard Andrzej Stefański, Katarzyna Kaczmarczyk-Kłak, Piotr Stępniak, Wojciech Zalewski, Adam Redzik, Agnieszka Lewicka-Zelent, Robert Opora, Anna Fidelus, Zbigniew Izdebski, Matthew Maycock, Doug J. Dretke, Helena Valkova, Frider Dunkel, Miklos Levay, Jacek Pomiankiewicz, Marcin Warchoł, Bartłomiej Kowalski. Redakcja kwartalnika „Przegląd Więziennictwa Polskiego” Redaktor Naczelny − Piotr Łapiński (tel. 22-640 8424), Zastępca Redaktora Naczelnego − Marcin Dudzik, Zastępca Redaktora Naczelnego − Robert Pelewicz, Redaktor językowy (język polski) − Małgorzata Nowotny, Redaktor językowy (język angielski) − Marta Kuźma, Redaktor statystyczny − Tomasz Banyś, Sekretarz Redakcji – Konrad Wierzbicki. Kontakt: Redakcja „Przeglądu Więziennictwa Polskiego”, ul. Wiśniowa 50, 02-520 Warszawa Redaktor naczelny − tel. 22-640 8424, e-mail: [email protected] Sekretarz redakcji – tel. 504-609-742, e-mail: [email protected] fax: 22 848 6268 Strona internetowa: http://www.sw.gov.pl/przeglad-wieziennictwa-polskiego Wydawca: Centralny Zarząd Służby Więziennej, 02-521 Warszawa, ul. Rakowiecka 37a. Warunki prenumeraty: „Przegląd Więziennictwa Polskiego” jest rozprowadzany drogą prenumeraty. Sprzedaż pojedynczych numerów prowadzi redakcja. Zamówienia na prenumeratę należy przesłać do redakcji i wpłacić odpowiednią kwotę na konto: Ministerstwo Sprawiedliwości CZSW, Biuro Budżetu NBP o/o Warszawa Nr 76 1010 1010 0401 5222 3100 0000 w NBP O/O W-wa. Cena jednego numeru wynosi 20 złotych, a prenumerata roczna 80 złotych.
    [Show full text]
  • Democratisation, Economic Reform and Human Rights in Poland – Conflict Or Consonance?
    Eras Edition 8, November 2006 – http://www.arts.monash.edu.au/eras Democratisation, economic reform and human rights in Poland – conflict or consonance? Thomas Bamforth (Norwegian Refugee Council, Formerly of the University of Melbourne) Abstract: This paper examines some of the conflicts underlying the apparently neutral and technical policies to bring about marketisation and democratisation in Poland. In particular, it looks at whether the underlying understanding of political activity and conceptions of human rights inherent in the political/economic reforms were consistent with Poland’s historical experience and rights traditions. The paper argues that the legacy of economic reform in Poland has undermined more culturally entrenched systems of economic production and democracy and has fragmented social understandings of what rights are in such a way as to undermine the legitimacy of the political and economic transition. The nature of man is intricate; the objects of society are of the greatest complexity; and therefore no simple disposition or direction of power can be suitable either to man’s nature or to the quality of his office. - Edmund Burke From its inception, capitalism has radically changed every material, social and cultural facet of the societies it has touched, and it continues to do so. - W. D. Perdue The rise of the economic technocrat, or technopols in John Williamson’s vocabulary of political economy, has severed economic analysis from its parental disciplines of moral philosophy, politics, and history. ‘Neutral’ economic fixes are thus available for reformist politicians who seek to open their societies to the potential riches of the free market. In Poland, the work of the technopols – Jeffrey Sachs and Leszek Balcerowicz who held positions of political power based on their economic expertise – has arguably succeeded.
    [Show full text]
  • The Protection of Human Rights in the New Polish Constitution
    Fordham International Law Journal Volume 22, Issue 2 1998 Article 2 The Protection of Human Rights in the New Polish Constitution Ryszard Cholewinski∗ ∗ Copyright c 1998 by the authors. Fordham International Law Journal is produced by The Berke- ley Electronic Press (bepress). http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ilj The Protection of Human Rights in the New Polish Constitution Ryszard Cholewinski Abstract This Article examines the extent of human rights protection under the Constitution of the Re- public of Poland of April 2, 1997 (”new Polish Constitution” or “Constitution”), adopted on April 2, 1997, by the Polish National Assembly and approved by the Polish people in a referendum on May 25, 1997. The Constitution, a lengthy document composed of 243 articles, came into force on October 17, 1997, and is one of the last constitutions to be adopted in Central and Eastern Europe since the start of the political and socio-economic transformations of the post-communist era. This Article emphasizes the importance of the new Polish Constitution in light of the long tradition of constitutionalism in Poland. Part I surveys some of the earlier constitutional texts, with particular focus on the provisions concerning the protection of human rights. After briefly discussing the difficulties encountered in drafting the new Polish Constitution, Part II analyzes the protection of rights and freedoms in the Constitution in light of the most recent developments. This part focuses on the general principles underlying rights and freedoms in the Constitution, certain prominent civil and political rights of particular importance in their specific Polish context, the debate surrounding the constitutionalization of economic and social rights, the protection of so-called ”third-generation rights” such as the right to a clean and healthy environment, and lim- itations on rights and freedoms.
    [Show full text]
  • Poland's Constitutional Crisis
    Contemporary Issues Poland’s P o l i Constitutional Crisis: c y B Facts and interpretations r i e f Marcin Matczak w w w . f l j s . o The Foundation for Law, Justice and Society r g in association with the Centre for Socio-Legal Studies and Wolfson College, University of Oxford www.fljs.org The Foundation for Law, Justice and Society © The Foundation for Law, Justice and Society 2018 Executive Summary This policy brief presents the crucial events of ‘the Polish constitutional crisis’, and what has been widely described as a backsliding on the part of Poland into authoritarianism. It attempts to explain the nature and possible causes of the crisis, offering three explanations: (1) historical, originating from the smooth, non-punitive nature of the post- Communist transition; (2) legal, relating to the excessive formalism of Polish legal culture; and (3) sociological, as a crisis of liberalism and of political identification among the youth and across society at large. POLAND’S CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS: FACTS AND INTERPRETATIONS . 1 Poland’s Constitutional Crisis: Facts and interpretations Introduction response was premature because a constitutional review of the previous appointments was already The Polish constitutional crisis began in November underway, and it was disproportionate because 2015, just after Poland’s governing party Prawo I three out of five of the previous appointments were Sprawiedliwosc (which translates as Law and Justice absolutely compliant with the Polish Constitution. and is commonly abbreviated to PiS) won the country’s parliamentary elections, and is characterized Some of the events that took place at the beginning by two principal phases.
    [Show full text]
  • Consultative Council of European Judges (Ccje
    Strasbourg, 12 October 2017 CCJE-BU(2017)9REV CONSULTATIVE COUNCIL OF EUROPEAN JUDGES (CCJE) Opinion of the CCJE Bureau following the request of the Polish National Council of the Judiciary to provide an opinion with respect to the Draft Act of September 2017 presented by the President of Poland amending the Act on the Polish National Council of the Judiciary and certain other acts 1 A. The request and the procedure of the assessment 1. By letter of 3 October 2017, the Chairman of the National Council of the Judiciary of Poland addressed the CCJE, requesting its opinion on the Draft Act on the National Council of the Judiciary of Poland (hereafter the Draft Act) presented by the President of Poland. The CCJE was requested, in particular, to assess the compatibility of the Draft Act with European standards on the independence of the judiciary and the status of councils for the judiciary. The CCJE was provided with the Draft Act as well as the Act of 12 May 2011 on the Polish National Council of the Judiciary, both in English translation. 2. According to its Terms of Reference, one of the tasks of the CCJE is to provide targeted cooperation, inter alia, at the request of the CCJE members, judicial bodies or relevant associations of judges, to enable States to comply with the Council of Europe standards concerning judges. The aforementioned request of the Polish National Council of the Judiciary (hereafter the Council) falls within the Terms of Reference of the CCJE. 3. The CCJE Bureau emphasises that it is not in a position to assess the constitutionality of the Draft Act.
    [Show full text]