EU accession:
the Copenhagen political criteria in ten Central and East European countries
Independence of the Judiciary
in Poland
Legislation
On the Constitutional Tribunal
site:
On the Supreme Court site:
Organisations
EU Opinion
of the European Commission 1997
The Judiciary: Structure
The independence of the Polish
judiciary vis-à-vis other institutions appears secured. Judges are
appointed by the President of the Republic on motions of the National Council
for the Judiciary, a collegiate body set up in 1989 whose 24 members consist
mainly of judges appointed by the jurisdictions to which they belong. The
President has the power to block an appointment put forward by the Council
(he has not done so thus far) but may not appoint a judge who has not been
put forward by the Council. Promotions follow the same procedure and the
National Council has sole responsibility in the matter of transfers. The
National Council for the Judiciary also appoints Justices of the Supreme
Court.
A Tribunal of State, whose
members are elected by the Sejm, adjudicates in criminal proceedings against
persons holding "supreme offices" within the State apparatus.
The Office of Public Prosecution
comes under the authority of the Minister for Justice who holds the office
of "Prosecutor General" and appoints prosecutors.
Administrative measures are
subject to a "Code of Administrative Procedure" and may be appealed against
in the administrative High Court whose decisions can be contested in the
administrative chamber of the Supreme Court. In recent years the Supreme
Court has developed a body of case-law which closely safeguards citizens’
rights. The Supreme Chamber of Control is responsible for financial and
administrative monitoring of all government bodies, other bodies financed
from the State budget and local authorities. All cases in which its intervention
is justified may be referred to it by the President, the Sejm or the Prime
Minister or it may act on its own initiative.
Poland has an Ombudsman appointed
by the Sejm, with the consent of the Senate, for a four-year term of office.
His task is to examine complaints submitted to him by private citizens
which he may refer to the Constitutional Tribunal.
The Constitutional Tribunal
is responsible for ensuring that laws and other legislative acts conform
to the Constitution. It may also issue legally binding interpretations
of the laws. Its members are elected by the Sejm for a nine-year, non-renewable
term of office.
Functioning of the Judiciary
The main problems affecting
the Polish justice system appear to be the time taken to process cases,
in particular in the fields of civil or commercial law, and the difficulty
enforcing decisions taken by the courts. The relatively low level of judges’
salaries is reflected in the numbers who leave to join the private sector,
which serves only to diminish further the effectiveness of the judiciary.
Until the entry into force
of the new Constitution of 1997, the prerogatives of the Constitutional
Tribunal appeared limited to say the least in that reference to it by citizens
or the courts was not possible and its decisions on the law could be overturned
if two-thirds of the members of the Sejm so decided. The new Constitution
does away with these limits (although the provision putting an end to the
Sejm’s power to overturn its decisions does not enter into force for another
two years).
Regular Report 1999
The Judiciary
Little progress has been
made in addressing the constraints identified in the Commission’s Opinion
and the 1998 Regular Report. The limited development of the Judiciary and
its administrative capacity remains a continuing source of concern. Furthermore,
the ongoing failure to address urgently required improvements in the provision
of the due process of law, permits a continuation of procedural and professional
constraints which hamper the civil, political and economic development
of Poland.
As described in the
1998 Report, the average times for processing court cases in civil, criminal
and commercial cases remain lengthy (see chapter on administrative capacity).
In consequence the enforcement of court rulings and the provisions of access
to the courts have not improved significantly since the Opinion. Indeed,
a number of cases have been taken by Polish citizens to the European Court
of Human Rights (ECHR) in particular regarding alleged breaches of related
Article 6 provisions on the due process of law and the right to be judged
within a reasonable timeframe. The first rulings made so far in favour
of the Polish plaintiffs, confirm that further attention needs to be paid
to addressing this issue, but it also confirms the proper functioning of
the ECHR mechanisms for citizens in Poland. The treatment of cases relating
to real estate issues continue to be severely hampered by the poor state
of the land register. However, the first signs of concrete
progress being made in the reform of the courts system has been registered
with the entry into force on 1 January 1999 of the law amending the common
courts system which transforms Voivodships courts into district courts
in line with the requirements of the state administration reform.
In general the independence
of the judiciary continues to be respected. However, concerns have been
expressed about proposals to place the Public Prosecutor's office under
the Ministry of Justice given the importance of guaranteeing the
independence of the judicial process from political pressures
The new Criminal Procedures
Code, new Penal Code and new Code of Penal Procedures described in the
1998 Report, entered into force on 1 September 1998.
Although some progress
has been recorded in the training of judges, significant further efforts
are expected to improve the status of judges, prosecutors and officials.
In particular, the level of enforcement of judicial decisions and the length
of judicial proceedings, particularly in commercial matters, require significant
further improvements.
Phare
A search on the Phare Search
Facility yields no programmes dealing directly with independence
of the judiciary in Poland, and three dealing with the judiciary generally
(1998,
1997,
1997). |