The Tribunal Explained · Poland's Constitutional Tribunal 1982–2026
Search Polski

Pending proceedings that could change the picture

Status as of: 31 October 2026, 13:00 CETLast updated: 31.10.2026

Matters whose outcome could change the picture of the dispute over the Tribunal: a competence dispute, cases before the Tribunal and in Strasbourg, steps after the CJEU judgment, proceedings against judges and motions to lift immunity. Deadlines calculated by the editors are marked as such. None of these matters has been decided unless stated.

C-448/23 Commission v Poland – follow-up to the judgment of 18 December 2025

Court of Justice of the EU / European Commission · since 18 Dec 2025

Subject
Implementation of the judgment in which the CJEU held that Poland failed to fulfil its obligations and that the Tribunal does not meet the requirements of an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.
Status
No data on further steps by the European Commission or the CJEU after the judgment. The Commission’s Rule of Law Report of 17 July 2026 records the judgment and the Tribunal’s reply that the CJEU lacks jurisdiction. No position of the Commission or the CJEU has been recorded since 30 October 2026.
Last step
The European Commission’s 2026 Rule of Law Report records the C-448/23 judgment and the Tribunal’s reply. (17 Jul 2026)
Parties / applicant
Applicant: European Commission; defendant: Poland.

no data unverified1,2,3,4

Dziurda and Others v. Poland (application no. 17392/26)

European Court of Human Rights

Subject
Application by four persons elected by the Sejm on 13 March 2026 who took the oath in the Sejm and have not been allowed to take up their duties. Filing date: no data.
Status
An interim measure was granted: the competent authorities are to refrain from hindering the applicants from taking up and exercising their duties. The Tribunal’s spokeswoman maintains that the ECtHR has no competence to rule on Poland’s constitutional order. As of 31 October the President of the Tribunal had not admitted the applicants to adjudication. Communication of the case, extension of the measure, judgment: no data (as of 31 October 2026, 13:00).
Last step
Interim measure (ECtHR press release of 6 May 2026; dated 5 May in the European Commission’s report). (5 May 2026)
Parties / applicant
Applicants: Marcin Dziurda, Anna Korwin-Piotrowska, Krystian Markiewicz, Maciej Taborowski; respondent State: Poland.

court finding5,3,6,7,8,9

K 7/26

Constitutional Tribunal – review of norms

Subject
Application by PiS and the KRS (as worded in the European Commission’s report). The interim decision concerns the Sejm’s election of the judge-members of the KRS by absolute majority; exact subject of review and filing date: no data.
Status
After the interim decision of 12 May 2026; no judgment according to sources available as of 31 October 2026, 13:00. The European Commission (report of 17 July 2026) notes that the bench included a person elected in 2017 to a seat held to be already filled, which raises an issue under Art. 6 ECHR.
Last step
Interim decision: the Sejm is to refrain from electing the judge-members of the KRS by absolute majority pending the judgment. (12 May 2026)
Parties / applicant
Applicants: PiS and the KRS (per the Commission’s report); addressee of the interim decision: the Sejm. Other participants: no data.

court finding3

Kpt 1/26 – application by the President of the Republic (President v. Sejm)

Constitutional Tribunal – competence dispute (Art. 189 of the Constitution) · since 04/2026

Subject
President Karol Nawrocki asks the Tribunal to declare that the Sejm has no power to organise acts replacing the statutory oath “before the President” and that the acts of 9 April 2026 had no legal effect for taking up office. Exact filing date: no data (end of April 2026).
Status
Pending according to the Tribunal President’s communiqué of 19 October 2026. Anna Korwin-Piotrowska’s orders of 30 October describe the case as heard by the full bench with Justyn Piskorski as rapporteur; his term ended on 18 September 2026. Current rapporteur, hearing date and outcome: no data. Dariusz Szostek and Magdalena Bentkowska refused to sit in the case (13 May 2026); five persons elected by the Sejm in 2026 maintain (23 October) that the dispute “does not exist”.
Last step
Tribunal President Bogdan Święczkowski added a statement by three judges (the communiqué’s wording) to the Kpt 1/26 file and forwarded it to the disciplinary officer; according to Prawo.pl it was signed by eight judges. (19 Oct 2026)
Parties / applicant
Applicant: President of the Republic; participant: the Sejm.

official statement10,6,11,9,12,13,14

Complaint by Sławomir Patyra against Bogdan Święczkowski (reference: no data)

National Prosecutor's Office – criminal complaint · since 28 Sep 2026

Subject
According to OKO.press: abuse of powers (Art. 231 of the Criminal Code) by composing benches in January–September 2026 without following the alphabetical order of Art. 38(1) of the Organisation Act.
Status
Whether proceedings were opened on this complaint: no data (as of 31 October 2026, 13:00). According to the “Information” published by Korwin-Piotrowska’s side on 30 October, prosecutors are conducting proceedings over the composition of benches; the document gives no reference. No court has ruled.
Last step
Complaint filed. (28 Sep 2026)
Parties / applicant
Complainant: Sławomir Patyra; concerns: Bogdan Święczkowski.

press report15,16

Five motions of the Prosecutor General of 30 October 2026: according to the Prosecutor General, four seek consent to prosecute Bogdan Święczkowski and one concerns the immunity of Bartłomiej Sochański (references: no data)

Constitutional Tribunal – General Assembly of judges (consent to criminal prosecution: Art. 196 of the Constitution, Arts. 20–23 of the Act on the Status of Tribunal Judges) · since 30 Oct 2026

Subject
Consent of the General Assembly to criminal prosecution. Legal classification of the acts and content of the charges: no data. According to the Prosecutor General: 224 pages, 50 volumes of files; addressee: Anna Korwin-Piotrowska. The communiqué of 31 October calls them motions “to lift immunity”.
Status
According to Anna Korwin-Piotrowska’s communiqué of 31 October, the motions arrived on 30 October and will be handled under the applicable rules; the communiqué gives neither their number nor a date. They are not on the agenda of the General Assembly called for 3 November (2027 budget only). The Act provides that the motion is filed with the President of the Tribunal; Bogdan Święczkowski’s side does not recognise Korwin-Piotrowska’s orders. In October 2025 the General Assembly refused consent on an earlier motion concerning Święczkowski.
Last step
A communiqué on trybunal.gov.pl confirms receipt of the motions concerning Święczkowski and Sochański. (31 Oct 2026)
Next step
Resolution of the General Assembly by an absolute majority of those taking part; the judge concerned does not vote (Art. 23 of the Status Act). Date of a sitting on the matter: no data.
Deadline
November 2026 — Own calculation, not a date from any document: Art. 23(1) of the Status Act provides for a resolution within one month; counted from receipt on 30 October 2026 – around 30 November 2026. Whether filing with the “President of the Tribunal” was effective is disputed.
Parties / applicant
Applicant: Prosecutor General Waldemar Żurek; the motions concern Bogdan Święczkowski (4) and Bartłomiej Sochański (1).

17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24

Investigation into breaches of law concerning the Tribunal judges elected on 13 March 2026 (reference: no data)

National Prosecutor's Office – investigation · since 21 Apr 2026

Subject
According to the National Prosecutor's Office notice of 22 April: (a) aiding and abetting a failure by the President to perform his duties by not receiving the oath of four persons elected on 13 March 2026 (Art. 18(3) read with Art. 231(1) of the Criminal Code); (b) failure by Tribunal officials to perform their duties towards those persons (Art. 231(1) and Art. 218(1a) read with Art. 11(2) of the Criminal Code). The complaint was filed by Tribunal judges Magdalena Bentkowska and Dariusz Szostek.
Status
On 23 September 2026 (24 September according to Brussels Signal) prosecutors charged the director of the Tribunal’s Chancellery and the commander of the Tribunal Guard; suspension from duties and a ban on entering the Tribunal were applied. According to Notes from Poland both denied the charges; the Tribunal called the charges a means of pressure. According to available sources no court has ruled (as of 31 October 2026, 13:00).
Last step
Charges against the director of the Tribunal’s Chancellery and the commander of the Tribunal Guard. (23 Sep 2026)
Parties / applicant
Conducted by: the National Prosecutor's Office; complainants: Magdalena Bentkowska and Dariusz Szostek; charged: the director of the Tribunal’s Chancellery and the commander of the Tribunal Guard.

official statement25,26,27,28

Proceedings concerning Dariusz Szostek, Magdalena Bentkowska and Sławomir Patyra (reference: no data)

Constitutional Tribunal – proceedings opened by the Tribunal President (described as disciplinary or explanatory) · since 24 Sep 2026

Subject
According to OKO.press: why the three judges refuse to adjudicate and to attend the General Assembly, and whether they notified prosecutors of a “crime that was not committed”; opened at the request of one of the Tribunal’s judges. According to Notes from Poland, the issue is a boycott of the General Assembly in solidarity with the four not allowed to adjudicate. Legal basis: no data.
Status
Further course: no data (as of 31 October 2026, 13:00). The Act on the Status of Tribunal Judges provides for a disciplinary officer drawn by lot (Art. 27(1)); whether one was drawn: no data. On 19 October the Tribunal President forwarded a statement which the Tribunal’s communiqué attributes to three judges; according to Prawo.pl it was signed by eight judges; the sources give no names.
Last step
Proceedings opened by Tribunal President Bogdan Święczkowski. (24 Sep 2026)
Parties / applicant
Opened by: Tribunal President Bogdan Święczkowski; concerned: Dariusz Szostek, Magdalena Bentkowska, Sławomir Patyra.

press report29,27,11,22,14

Sources (29)
  1. [CJEU / EU law] CJEU, “Państwo prawne: nie respektując orzecznictwa Trybunału Sprawiedliwości, polski Trybunał Konstytucyjny naruszył kilka podstawowych zasad prawa Unii (komunikat prasowy nr 157/25, C-448/23)”, 18 Dec 2025. curia.europa.eu (accessed 31.10.2026)
  2. [CJEU / EU law] EUR-Lex, “Wyrok Trybunału (wielka izba) z dnia 18 grudnia 2025 r. Komisja Europejska przeciwko Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej, sprawa C-448/23”, 18 Dec 2025. eur-lex.europa.eu (accessed 31.10.2026)
  3. [EU institution] European Commission (Council of the EU register), “2026 Rule of Law Report – Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Poland, SWD(2026) 921 final”, 17 Jul 2026. data.consilium.europa.eu (accessed 31.10.2026)
  4. [press] Euronews EN, “Poland political crisis: Constitutional court in chaos as Nawrocki accuses government of staging power grab”, 31 Oct 2026, 10:30. euronews.com (accessed 31.10.2026)
  5. [ECtHR] ECtHR, “Interim measure granted concerning Poland”, 6 May 2026. echr.coe.int (accessed 31.10.2026)
  6. [press] Notes from Poland, “European court orders Polish Constitutional Tribunal to accept judges rejected by president”, 6 May 2026, 16:20. notesfrompoland.com (accessed 31.10.2026)
  7. [press] OKO.press, “ETPCz zakazuje prezesowi TK Święczkowskiemu blokowania czterech nowych sędziów”, 6 May 2026. oko.press (accessed 31.10.2026)
  8. [press] Polsat News, “Sejm wybrał. Jest nowy sędzia Trybunału Konstytucyjnego”, 11 Jun 2026, 14:30. polsatnews.pl (accessed 31.10.2026)
  9. [Constitutional Tribunal] Trybunał Konstytucyjny (trybunal.gov.pl), “Zarządzenie w sprawie przerwy w czynnościach sędziego Trybunału Konstytucyjnego Bogdana Święczkowskiego”, 30 Oct 2026. trybunal.gov.pl (accessed 31.10.2026)
  10. [press] Dziennik Gazeta Prawna, “Prezydent Karol Nawrocki uderza w „sejmowe ślubowania”. Wniosek o spór kompetencyjny już w TK”, 29 Apr 2026, 18:30. gazetaprawna.pl (accessed 31.10.2026)
  11. [Constitutional Tribunal] Trybunał Konstytucyjny (trybunal.gov.pl), “Komentarz w sprawie oświadczenia trójki sędziów Trybunału Konstytucyjnego”, 19 Oct 2026. trybunal.gov.pl (accessed 31.10.2026)
  12. [press] Prawo.pl, “Skład TK do sporu kompetencyjnego wadliwy - Bentkowska i Szostek nie będą orzekać”, 13 May 2026, 13:26. prawo.pl (accessed 31.10.2026)
  13. [press] TVN24, “Nowe oświadczenie sędziów Trybunału Konstytucyjnego. Dotyczy sporu kompetencyjnego”, 23 Oct 2026, 15:22. tvn24.pl (accessed 31.10.2026)
  14. [press] Prawo.pl, “Święczkowski przesłał oświadczenie nowych sędziów TK do rzecznika dyscyplinarnego”, 19 Oct 2026, 15:06. prawo.pl (accessed 31.10.2026)
  15. [press] OKO.press, “Sędzia TK złożył zawiadomienie na Święczkowskiego. Zarzuca mu manipulowanie składami orzekającymi”, 28 Sep 2026. oko.press (accessed 31.10.2026)
  16. [Constitutional Tribunal] Trybunał Konstytucyjny (trybunal.gov.pl), “Informacja w sprawie zarządzenia przerwy w czynnościach służbowych Bogdana Święczkowskiego oraz Bartłomieja Sochańskiego na podstawie art. 130 ustawy – Prawo o ustroju sądów powszechnych”, 30 Oct 2026. trybunal.gov.pl (accessed 31.10.2026)
  17. [press] TVN24, “Bogdan Święczkowski odsunięty. Komunikat Waldemara Żurka”, 30 Oct 2026, 18:57. tvn24.pl (accessed 31.10.2026)
  18. [press] Rzeczpospolita, “Co dzieje się w Trybunale Konstytucyjnym? Interwencja policji i „zamach stanu” krok po kroku”, 30 Oct 2026, 19:59. rp.pl (accessed 31.10.2026)
  19. [Constitutional Tribunal] trybunal.gov.pl (dokument podpisany przez Annę Korwin-Piotrowską), “Komunikat”, 31 Oct 2026. trybunal.gov.pl (accessed 31.10.2026)
  20. [Constitutional Tribunal] Trybunał Konstytucyjny, “Komunikat (PDF)”, 31 Oct 2026. trybunal.gov.pl (accessed 31.10.2026)
  21. [Constitutional Tribunal] Trybunał Konstytucyjny (trybunal.gov.pl), “Zarządzenie nr 1/2026 sędzi Trybunału Konstytucyjnego zastępującej Prezesa Trybunału Konstytucyjnego z dnia 30 października 2026 r.”, 30 Oct 2026. trybunal.gov.pl (accessed 31.10.2026)
  22. [legislation] Kancelaria Sejmu (ISAP), “Ustawa z dnia 30 listopada 2016 r. o statusie sędziów Trybunału Konstytucyjnego”, 30 Nov 2016. api.sejm.gov.pl (accessed 31.10.2026)
  23. [parliament] Sejm RP, “Konstytucja Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej z dnia 2 kwietnia 1997 r.”, 2 Apr 1997. sejm.gov.pl (accessed 31.10.2026)
  24. [press] Notes from Poland, “Polish constitutional court rejects justice minister’s request to lift chief justice’s immunity”, 17 Oct 2025, 11:01. notesfrompoland.com (accessed 31.10.2026)
  25. [official] Prokuratura Krajowa, “Śledztwo w sprawie naruszeń prawa dotyczących sędziów Trybunału Konstytucyjnego”, 22 Apr 2026. gov.pl (accessed 31.10.2026)
  26. [press] OKO.press, “Zarzuty karne dla urzędników TK Święczkowskiego. Za blokowanie nowych sędziów”, 23 Sep 2026. oko.press (accessed 31.10.2026)
  27. [press] Notes from Poland, “Polish constitutional court officials charged with preventing entry of new judges”, 24 Sep 2026, 14:54. notesfrompoland.com (accessed 31.10.2026)
  28. [press] Brussels Signal, “Tusk moves to take over constitutional court by force”, 15 Oct 2026, 13:21. brusselssignal.eu (accessed 31.10.2026)
  29. [press] OKO.press, “Odwet Święczkowskiego. Chce ścigania dyscyplinarnego nowych sędziów Trybunału”, 24 Sep 2026. oko.press (accessed 31.10.2026)
← Back to the summary