2017–2023: a new composition, a presidency-term dispute and landmark rulings

Level of detail: Basics4 min read

What this page covers

Poland's Constitutional Tribunal checks whether laws comply with the Constitution. Its 15 judges are elected for nine years by the Sejm, the lower house of parliament.

New judges

Between 2017 and 2022 the Sejm elected 11 judges. Law and Justice (PiS) then held the Sejm majority. They were:

• in 2017: Grzegorz Jędrejek, Andrzej Zielonacki and Justyn Piskorski;
• in 2018: Jarosław Wyrembak;
• in 2019: Wojciech Sych, Krystyna Pawłowicz, Stanisław Piotrowicz and Jakub Stelina;
• Rafał Wojciechowski, whose term began in January 2020;
• in 2020: Bartłomiej Sochański;
• in 2022: Bogdan Święczkowski.

Some had political careers: Krystyna Pawłowicz and Stanisław Piotrowicz had been elected to parliament from PiS lists. Jarosław Wyrembak was a PiS member, according to a Sejm paper. Bartłomiej Sochański was a PiS member and its candidate for mayor of Szczecin in 2018. Bogdan Święczkowski was National Prosecutor (deputy to the Prosecutor General) when elected. Opposition politicians and some lawyers objected that Pawłowicz and Piotrowicz were over 65 when elected; the sources name no provision they relied on. PiS called the objections political.

Three disputed seats

In December 2015, in judgment K 34/15, the Tribunal held that three of its seats had been validly filled in October 2015. It also held that the President must take an elected judge's oath without delay; he did not take that of those elected in October. In December 2015 the Sejm elected other people to the same seats, including Mariusz Muszyński. After two died in 2017, the Sejm elected Justyn Piskorski and Jarosław Wyrembak in their place.

In 2021, in a Polish company's case (Xero Flor), the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) held that a Tribunal bench including Muszyński was not a "tribunal established by law". In M.L. (2023), an individual's case, it found that a judgment given with Piskorski and Wyrembak also sitting fell short of rule-of-law requirements. In K 6/21 (November 2021), on the Prosecutor General's application, the Tribunal held a European Convention on Human Rights provision unconstitutional insofar as it lets the ECtHR assess the election of the Tribunal's judges.

A dispute over the President's term

Julia Przyłębska led the Tribunal from December 2016. The law says that the President's term "lasts six years". Six judges, like Prof. Stanisław Biernat and most retired judges, argued that her term ended in December 2022. Przyłębska, like Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki, maintained that she held office until her judicial term ended in December 2024. On 1 March 2023 the judges' General Assembly, convened by Przyłębska, resolved that there were no grounds to select candidates for President.

This coincided with problems in its work. The most important cases go to the full bench: at least 11 of the 15 judges. Think of a football team that cannot play without eleven players. Media reported repeated postponements of full-bench hearings in 2023. It decided Kp 1/23, on a Supreme Court law, only on 11 December 2023, with 11 judges.

Key rulings

• K 1/20 (22 October 2020): the Tribunal held unconstitutional a provision of the Family Planning Act concerning the termination of pregnancy. It is the judgment the ECtHR assessed in M.L.
• P 7/20 (July 2021) and K 3/21 (October 2021): the Tribunal held certain EU treaty provisions, read in a particular way, incompatible with the Polish Constitution. K 3/21 was brought by Prime Minister Morawiecki. At issue were EU Court of Justice (CJEU) interim measures on Polish courts and whether courts may review judicial appointments. In 2025 the CJEU held (C-448/23) that these judgments breached EU law and that, owing to the election of three judges in December 2015 and of the President in December 2016, the Tribunal is not an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. The Tribunal replied that the CJEU has no jurisdiction over it.

Why it matters

Tribunal rulings change the law. The bench matters too: a European court finding that a bench was not a "tribunal established by law" means the state violated someone's rights.

Level of detail: For followers11 min read

Starting point: the Tribunal's leadership in 2017–2018

On 20 December 2016 President of the Republic Andrzej Duda made Judge Julia Przyłębska acting President of the Constitutional Tribunal, and on 21 December 2016 appointed her President.^1,2 Her nine-year term as a judge ran from 9 December 2015 to 9 December 2024.²

In 2017 Przyłębska sent Vice-President Stanisław Biernat on compulsory leave under the Labour Code (9 January – 31 March and 1 April – 26 June 2017), which he disputed; according to the Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights (HFPC), it kept him off the bench in Kp 1/17, among other cases.^3,4

On 5 July 2017 the President of the Republic appointed Mariusz Muszyński Vice-President of the Tribunal (M.P. 2017 item 684).^5,4

The government left judgment K 47/15 of 9 March 2016, and K 39/16 and K 44/16, unpublished for over two years; they were published under an act passed on a PiS initiative (bill of 22 March 2018, passed 12 April), after Przyłębska's order of 29 May.¹ On 5 June 2018 K 47/15 and K 39/16 appeared in the Journal of Laws (Dz.U. 2018 items 1077 and 1078), with headings stating that they had been issued in breach of the 2015 Act.^6,7

Elections of judges, 2017–2022

Between 2017 and 2022 the Sejm of the 8th (2015–2019) and 9th (2019–2023) terms, both with PiS majorities, elected 11 judges.^8,9,10,2 Election, oath and start of term are separate events; start-of-term dates come from English Wikipedia.²

Pawłowicz, Piotrowicz and Stelina were elected on 21 November 2019 after 11 p.m.; according to OKO.press, PiS MPs voted for and the opposition against.¹⁷ Prof. Marek Chmaj and Prof. Marcin Matczak, both lawyers, and opposition politicians objected that Pawłowicz and Piotrowicz, both 67, were over 65; the sources do not say which provision they relied on, and PiS called this political.¹⁷ The opposition also cited Piotrowicz's past as a prosecutor in the Polish People's Republic (PRL) and as an activist of its ruling party, the PZPR.¹⁷

On 7 February 2022 the Justice Committee gave its opinion on Bogdan Święczkowski by 15 votes to 14; the next day the Sejm elected him (absolute majority required: 228).¹⁸ According to OKO.press, five Konfederacja (Confederation) MPs voted for him and Kukiz'15 against; the outlet described him as a close associate of Zbigniew Ziobro.¹⁸ Kieres's seat had been vacant for over six months; OKO.press noted that all judges had now been elected while PiS governed.¹⁸

The three seats covered by judgment K 34/15

In K 34/15 of 3 December 2015 the Tribunal held valid the election on 8 October 2015 of three judges to seats falling vacant on 6 November 2015.¹⁹ In the same judgment the Tribunal held that the President must take the oath of a judge elected by the Sejm without delay; he did not accept it from those elected, Roman Hauser, Andrzej Jakubecki and Krzysztof Ślebzak, who never sat.^2,19 In December 2015 the Sejm elected three other people to those seats, including Mariusz Muszyński (see the chapter on the 2015–2017 crisis).^20,19

After Lech Morawski died (12 July 2017) and Henryk Cioch died (20 December 2017), the Sejm elected Justyn Piskorski and Jarosław Wyrembak to their seats.^1,10,15 In M.L. v. Poland the ECtHR found that both had been elected, in 2017 and 2018, to the seats of judges chosen in the same defective procedure.¹⁴

Rzeczpospolita reported that on 20 June 2018 the Regional Administrative Court in Warsaw (V SA/Wa 459/18) held that Muszyński was not authorised to adjudicate in the Tribunal; whether that judgment became final has not been established.²¹ The Supreme Administrative Court (NSA, III OSK 2528/21) found, as Rzeczpospolita reported on 7 December 2022, that the participation of Muszyński, Piskorski and Wyrembak left the Tribunal “zainfekowany bezprawnością” (“infected with unlawfulness”).²²

The dispute over the President's term

The Act of 30 November 2016 on the Organisation of the Constitutional Tribunal and the Procedure before It (the Organisation Act) provides that the President of the Republic appoints the President of the Tribunal from candidates put forward by the General Assembly of Judges, and that the President's term "lasts six years" (Art. 10(1)–(2)).²³ It ends earlier with the judicial term (Art. 10(3)) and the same rules apply to the Vice-President (Art. 10(5)).²³

Around the turn of 2022 and 2023 six judges — Wojciech Sych, Jakub Stelina, Mariusz Muszyński, Andrzej Zielonacki, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski and Bogdan Święczkowski, over a third of the bench — demanded that the General Assembly be convened to select candidates, copying the President of the Republic.^24,25

According to Rzeczpospolita of 4 January 2023, Prof. Stanisław Biernat, most retired Tribunal judges and Batory Foundation experts held that the term had ended on 20 December 2022, while Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said it lasted until the end of Przyłębska's term as a judge.²⁴ Przyłębska maintained that she held office until 9 December 2024.²⁵ A PAP news agency headline reported the government spokesperson as saying that Przyłębska was President and that judges who stayed away from a sitting would commit a disciplinary offence.²⁶

The General Assembly convened by Przyłębska met on 1 March 2023 and, with two thirds of the judges present, resolved by an absolute majority that there were no legal or factual grounds to convene it to select candidates, noting that it had not been convened under Art. 11(3); a further letter from the six was dated 28 February 2023 (TVN24).²⁵ President Andrzej Duda described the Tribunal as “wewnętrznie skłócony” (internally at odds).²⁵

Przyłębska continued to act as President, considering that her term ran until December 2024, while the six judges – and from 2024 the Sejm and the government – held that it had ended in December 2022; according to English Wikipedia she resigned on 29 November 2024 (see the chapter on 2023–2025).^2,25,27 Under the same Art. 10, Mariusz Muszyński served as Vice-President from 5 July 2017 to 5 July 2023; the post was then vacant until Bartłomiej Sochański took it on 21 February 2025.^2,5 Muszyński was himself one of the six; the act formally ending his vice-presidency has not been found.^24,2

Who claims what

The full bench in 2023 and judgment Kp 1/23

A full bench needs at least 11 of the 15 judges (Art. 37(2) of the Organisation Act).²³ In 2023 OKO.press, Wprost and GazetaPrawna reported repeated postponements of a full-bench hearing, bench changes and “narady w niepełnym składzie” (deliberations without a full bench).^34,35,36

The President of the Republic referred the Act of 13 January 2023 amending the Supreme Court Act and certain other acts for preventive (pre-signature) review (case Kp 1/23).³⁷ On 11 December 2023 a bench of 11 presided over by Przyłębska, including Piskorski and Wyrembak, gave judgment, with Piotr Pszczółkowski dissenting.³⁷

The Tribunal held the provisions under review incompatible with, among others, Arts. 178, 179 (read with 144(3)(17)), 180(1), 183(1) and 184 of the Constitution and inseparable from the whole Act, discontinuing the remainder.³⁷

Two of the six judges who disputed the President's term, Jędrzejewski and Święczkowski, sat in Kp 1/23; Sych, Stelina, Muszyński and Zielonacki did not.^37,25

Key rulings, 2020–2022

• U 2/20 (20 April 2020): the Tribunal held unconstitutional a resolution of the joint chambers of the Supreme Court of 23 January 2020; Leon Kieres dissented.¹
• K 1/20 (22 October 2020): a 13-judge bench presided over by Przyłębska and including Pawłowicz, Muszyński, Wyrembak and Piskorski held by 11 votes to 2 that Art. 4a(1)(2) of the Family Planning Act (a provision on termination of pregnancy) was unconstitutional; published in Dz.U., the judgment took effect on 27 January 2021.¹⁴
• Reaction to K 1/20: in M.L. v. Poland (14 December 2023) the ECtHR found that the judgment, given by a bench including Muszyński, Piskorski and Wyrembak, did not meet rule-of-law requirements, so the interference with the applicant's rights was not "in accordance with the law" and violated Art. 8 ECHR.¹⁴
• P 7/20 (14 July 2021): on a question of law from the Supreme Court, a five-judge bench (Piotrowicz presiding, Sochański rapporteur, Jędrzejewski, Piskorski, Stelina) held by majority that Art. 4(3), second sentence, TEU read with Art. 279 TFEU is unconstitutional insofar as, in the Tribunal's words, the CJEU "ultra vires" imposes interim measures on the organisation of Polish courts.³¹
• K 3/21 (7 October 2021): on the Prime Minister's application, a 12-judge bench presided over by Przyłębska (rapporteur Sochański) held certain provisions of the Treaty on European Union, understood as described, unconstitutional, including as regards review of judicial appointments and KRS resolutions; Pszczółkowski and Wyrembak dissented.³²
• K 6/21 (24 November 2021): on the Prosecutor General's application, a five-judge bench (Przyłębska presiding, Sych rapporteur, Jędrzejewski, Sochański, Warciński) unanimously held Art. 6(1), first sentence, ECHR unconstitutional insofar as it treats the Tribunal as a "court" and lets the ECtHR assess the election of its judges.²⁹

European court reactions in brief

In Xero Flor w Polsce sp. z o.o. v. Poland (no. 4907/18; 7 May 2021, final 7 August 2021) the ECtHR found that with Muszyński on it the Tribunal bench was not a "tribunal established by law" (Art. 6 ECHR).^19,1

The European Commission decided on 15 February 2023 to take Poland to the CJEU over the Tribunal's case law (Reuters).³⁸ On 18 December 2025 (C-448/23) the CJEU found that P 7/20 and K 3/21 breached EU law and that, because of the election of three judges in December 2015 and of its President in December 2016, the Tribunal is not an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.^20,39 The Tribunal replied that the CJEU lacks jurisdiction over it (see the chapter on Europe).³³

On 20 December 2017 the European Commission submitted a reasoned proposal under Article 7(1) TEU, citing the absence of independent and legitimate constitutional review.⁴⁰ According to Secretariat notes, the Committee of Ministers, which supervises execution of Xero Flor, called in December 2023 for admitting the judges elected in October 2015 and excluding those irregularly elected, among other things.³⁰

Level of detail: Expert23 min read

Scope and state of the sources

This level covers the Tribunal's composition and leadership from 2017 to the end of 2023 and the rulings of that period that drew responses from other Polish and European courts.^1,2 The research notes record that during the research session ISAP, monitorpolski.gov.pl and the Polish-language pages of trybunal.gov.pl were unavailable, while the Tribunal's English pages and HUDOC conversions were accessible; as a result, several M.P. numbers and exact dates of Sejm resolutions from 2018–2022 remain unverified.^1,2

Voting data for 2017–2018 come from the Sejm API, and start-of-term dates for 2018–2022 from English Wikipedia (a secondary source).^3,4 The text keeps apart election by the Sejm, the oath, the start of term and sitting on benches, and it treats the office of President or Vice-President (appointed by the President of the Republic) separately from a judge's mandate.⁵

Legal basis: the Organisation Act of 30 November 2016

• Art. 10(1) of the Act on the Organisation of the Constitutional Tribunal and the Procedure before It (Dz.U. 2016 item 2072): the President of the Republic appoints the President of the Tribunal from candidates put forward by the General Assembly of Judges of the Tribunal.⁵
• Art. 10(2)–(4): the term of office of the President of the Tribunal "lasts six years"; it ends earlier when the person's term as judge ends, when the mandate expires or on resignation; reappointment is not allowed.^5,6
• Art. 10(5): paragraphs 1–4 apply accordingly to the Vice-President; according to the consolidated text (Dz.U. 2019 item 2393) the provision also states that the Vice-President's term ends upon appointment as President.^5,6
• Art. 11(1)–(4): the General Assembly puts forward candidates within a month of the vacancy arising, and until a President is appointed the judge with the longest service directs the Tribunal's work.⁵
• Art. 8(1): resolutions of the General Assembly are adopted by an absolute majority with at least two thirds of all judges present, i.e. 10 of 15.^5,6
• Art. 37(2): a full bench requires at least 11 judges.⁵

Composition 2017–2022: elections, votes, publication

2017

• Grzegorz Jędrejek. On 24 February 2017 (36th sitting) the Sejm added the election of a Tribunal judge (papers nos. 1310 and 1312) to its agenda by 232 votes to 194, and at 11:50 elected Jędrejek: 234 for, 154 against, 26 abstentions, 46 not voting.⁷ The resolution was published as M.P. 2017 item 224; PiS nominated him, and he took the oath on 27 February 2017.^8,9,10 Jędrejek died in office on 19 January 2020.⁴
• Andrzej Wróbel's seat. Wróbel announced his resignation in mid-December 2016; on 11 January 2017 the KRS agreed to his return to the Supreme Court, and the President of the Republic appointed him to the Supreme Court on 24 January 2017.⁹ The Tribunal's General Assembly declared his mandate expired in early February 2017; the exact date of that resolution has not been established.⁹
• Andrzej Zielonacki. On 8 June 2017 at 23:51 (43rd sitting, vote no. 69) the Sejm elected him by 227 for, 175 against, 4 abstentions and 54 not voting (majority required: 204).¹¹ The resolution was published as M.P. 2017 item 610; PiS nominated him and he took Biernat's seat; the date of his oath has not been established.^8,12
• Justyn Piskorski. On 15 September 2017 at 9:45 (47th sitting, vote no. 3) the Sejm elected him by 248 for, 3 against, 18 abstentions and 191 not voting; the opposition did not take part in the vote.¹³ The resolution was published as M.P. 2017 item 873; the nominating body and the date of his oath have not been established, and the press presented him as a PiS candidate.^8,14,15 He took the seat of Lech Morawski, who died on 12 July 2017.¹⁶

2018–2019

• Jarosław Wyrembak. On 26 January 2018 at 11:51 (57th sitting, vote no. 93) the Sejm elected him by 228 for, 25 against, 2 abstentions and 205 not voting.³ The resolution was published as M.P. 2018 item 134; his term began on 30 January 2018, and the nominating body has not been established.^14,4 He took the seat of Henryk Cioch, who died on 20 December 2017; according to Sejm paper no. 19 (his candidacy for the State Tribunal), cited by Demagog, he had been a PiS member since 2010.^16,17
• Wojciech Sych. According to English Wikipedia he received 228 votes and his term began on 8 April 2019; the day of election, the nominating body and his predecessor have not been confirmed.⁴
• Krystyna Pawłowicz, Stanisław Piotrowicz, Jakub Stelina. The Sejm elected them on Thursday 21 November 2019 after 11 p.m.; Piotrowicz received 230 votes, Stelina 233 and Pawłowicz about 230; their terms began on 5 December 2019.^18,4 They took the three seats of Marek Zubik, Piotr Tuleja and Stanisław Rymar, but which of them took which seat has not been established.⁴
• Political background and objections. According to Demagog, citing the National Electoral Commission (PKW), Pawłowicz was an MP from the PiS list in 2011–2015 and sat in the presidium of the PiS club but was not a party member; Piotrowicz was a senator from the PiS list in 2005–2007 and an MP from the PiS list (2011, 2015), likewise without party membership.¹⁷ Stelina was nominated by PiS MPs; he was a professor and former dean of the Faculty of Law and Administration at the University of Gdańsk.¹⁸ Prof. Marek Chmaj, Prof. Marcin Matczak and the opposition objected that Pawłowicz and Piotrowicz (both aged 67) were over 65; PiS dismissed these opinions as political, and the opposition also pointed to Piotrowicz's past as a PRL prosecutor and PZPR activist.¹⁸

2020–2022

• Rafał Wojciechowski. According to English Wikipedia he received 239 votes and his term began on 7 January 2020; the day of election (probably December 2019) and the nominating body have not been confirmed. ⚠ unverified⁴
• Bartłomiej Sochański. The Sejm elected him on 6 April 2020 (234 votes) on a motion by the PiS club; his term began on 9 April 2020.^17,4 According to Demagog he was a PiS member and the party's candidate for mayor of Szczecin in 2018 (about 22% in the second round).¹⁷
• Bogdan Święczkowski. The Justice Committee gave its opinion on 7 February 2022 by 15 votes to 14, and the Sejm elected him on 8 February 2022: 233 for, 219 against, 2 abstentions, 6 not voting, with an absolute majority of 228.^19,20 Five Konfederacja MPs (Bosak, Braun, Tuduj, Urbaniak, Winnicki) voted for him and Kukiz'15 voted against; his term began on 16 February 2022.^19,4 When elected he was National Prosecutor (since 2016), having earlier headed the ABW (2006–2007); he took the seat of Leon Kieres, whose term ended on 23 July 2021.¹⁹
• Formal nominations. For Wyrembak, Sych, Wojciechowski and Święczkowski the sources do not confirm whether the candidate was put forward by the Presidium of the Sejm or by a group of at least 50 MPs; Demagog confirms nomination by the PiS club only for Sochański.¹⁷

Seat balance, 2018–2023

The composition on 1 November 2023 follows from combining the Kp 1/23 bench (11 persons) with the list of the six judges who signed the request for a General Assembly (four further persons): Przyłębska, Pszczółkowski, Muszyński, Piskorski, Wyrembak, Jędrzejewski, Warciński, Zielonacki, Sych, Pawłowicz, Piotrowicz, Stelina, Wojciechowski, Sochański and Święczkowski.^1,22

Leadership and adjudication practice in 2017–2018

• Vice-President Biernat's leave. Przyłębska sent Stanisław Biernat on compulsory leave (9 January – 31 March and 1 April – 26 June 2017), citing the Labour Code; the specific article has not been established, and Biernat argued that the leave entitlement had become time-barred.²⁴ According to the HFPC, the leave kept him off the bench in Kp 1/17, among others.¹⁰
• Vice-President Muszyński. Decision of the President of the Republic no. 1131.10.2017 of 5 July 2017 appointing the Vice-President of the Tribunal was published as M.P. 2017 item 684 (10 July 2017); Muszyński's name is confirmed by the HFPC and the press, because the title of the act does not contain it.^8,10 On 27 July 2017 the General Assembly adopted new Rules of the Tribunal (M.P. 2017 item 767).⁸
• Benches in 2017. According to the HFPC, in Kp 1/17 (16 March 2017, M.P. 2017 item 265) Muszyński was rapporteur and Cioch and Morawski sat on the bench.¹⁰ An application by the Prosecutor General of January 2017 led to the exclusion of Judges Zubik, Tuleja and Rymar from two full-bench cases (Kp 1/17 and Kp 4/15); the decisions were taken by Cioch, Muszyński and Jędrejek.¹⁰
• K 1/17 (24 October 2017). Muszyński and Cioch sat on the five-judge bench despite a motion by the Commissioner for Human Rights (RPO) to exclude them; Kieres dissented.^10,16 The HFPC report is internally inconsistent as to whether Muszyński presided or was rapporteur.¹⁰
• The Xero Flor company's case before the Tribunal. On 5 July 2017 the Tribunal discontinued the proceedings by 3 votes to 2, sitting as a five-judge bench with Muszyński as rapporteur; Piotr Tuleja's dissent argued that Muszyński's election to a filled seat breached Art. 194(1) of the Constitution.^21,25
• Statistics. According to the HFPC, the Tribunal issued 36 judgments and 53 decisions in 2017; elsewhere the report gives 35 judgments.¹⁰
• Publication of withheld judgments (2018). PiS submitted the bill on 22 March 2018, the Sejm passed it on 12 April, the President of the Republic signed it on 2 May, and it entered into force on 23 May 2018; on 29 May Przyłębska ordered publication of K 47/15, K 39/16 and K 44/16.¹⁶ On 5 June 2018 K 47/15 (Dz.U. 2018 item 1077) and K 39/16 (item 1078) were published; the position of K 44/16 (probably item 1079) has not been verified. ⚠ unverified^26,27

The dispute over the President's term (December 2022 – 2023)

• Starting point. The President of the Republic entrusted Przyłębska with the duties of President of the Tribunal on 20 December 2016 and appointed her on 21 December 2016; on one view, the six-year term under Art. 10(2) counted from that date ended on 20 or 21 December 2022.^16,5,29
• The six judges' demand. Sych, Stelina, Muszyński, Zielonacki, Jędrzejewski and Święczkowski, more than a third of the bench, demanded that the General Assembly be convened to select candidates for President and sent a copy to the President of the Republic; the exact date and wording of the first letter (late December 2022 or early January 2023) have not been established.^29,22
• Stelina's letter. Rzeczpospolita headlined an article with a quotation from Stelina's letter to Przyłębska: “kadencja Pani jako Prezesa już wygasła” (“your term as President has already expired”); the article itself was not opened, and the date of the letter is uncertain. ⚠ unverified³⁰
• Outside views. Prof. Stanisław Biernat, most retired Tribunal judges and Batory Foundation experts named 20 December 2022 as the end of the term; Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said the office lasted until the end of her term as a judge, “za niecałe dwa lata” (in less than two years).²⁹
• The government spokesperson. According to the headline of a PAP report, the government spokesperson stated that Przyłębska was President of the Tribunal and that judges who did not take part in a sitting would commit a disciplinary offence; the report itself was not opened.³¹
• The General Assembly of 1 March 2023. Convened by Przyłębska, with two thirds of the judges present, it resolved by an absolute majority that there were no legal or factual grounds to convene the Assembly to select candidates, noting that it had not been convened under Art. 11(3); TVN24 dates a further letter from the six judges to 28 February 2023.²²
• Przyłębska's and the President's positions. Przyłębska maintained that her office lasted until 9 December 2024; President Duda described the Tribunal as “wewnętrznie skłócony” (internally at odds).²²
• Outcome. Przyłębska acted as President until resigning on 29 November 2024, ten days before the end of her term as a judge (9 December 2024); from 2024 the Sejm and the government held that her term as President had ended in December 2022.⁴

Mariusz Muszyński's vice-presidency

Muszyński held office as Vice-President from 5 July 2017 to 5 July 2023; the post then stayed vacant until 21 February 2025, when Bartłomiej Sochański became Vice-President.⁴ The document by which his office formally ended (a letter or an act) has not been found.⁴

2023: the full bench and judgment Kp 1/23

According to press headlines, in 2023 the Tribunal repeatedly postponed a full-bench hearing and changed the bench, and OKO.press, Wprost and GazetaPrawna wrote about cancelled hearings and “narady w niepełnym składzie” (deliberations without a full bench); the articles themselves were not opened.^33,34,35

Case Kp 1/23 concerned the President of the Republic's application for preventive review of the Act of 13 January 2023 amending the Supreme Court Act and certain other acts; the date of the application (probably February 2023) has not been established. ⚠ unverified¹ The judgment of 11 December 2023 was given by a bench of 11 judges, the minimum for a full bench: Przyłębska (presiding), Sochański (rapporteur), Jędrzejewski, Pawłowicz, Piotrowicz, Piskorski, Pszczółkowski, Święczkowski, Warciński, Wojciechowski, Wyrembak; Pszczółkowski dissented.¹

Operative part: the provisions under review are incompatible with Art. 179 read with Art. 144(3)(17), with Art. 178, with Art. 180(1) and with Arts. 184 and 183(1) of the Constitution; they are inseparably linked to the whole Act, and the proceedings were discontinued in the remaining scope.¹ Publication is indicated as M.P. 2023 item 1468; the address comes from search results and the document was not opened. ⚠ unverified³⁶

Rulings 2019–2023: benches, operative parts, publication

• K 12/18 (25 March 2019). The Tribunal held the election of the 15 judge-members of the KRS by the Sejm to be constitutional; Polish Wikipedia records criticism of Piskorski's participation in the bench without naming its authors.¹⁶
• U 1/17 (12 March 2020). An application of 11 January 2017 by Prosecutor General Zbigniew Ziobro concerned the 2010 Sejm resolutions electing Rymar, Tuleja and Zubik; the Tribunal discontinued the proceedings, with dissents by Kieres, Pszczółkowski and Wyrembak.¹⁶
• U 2/20 (20 April 2020). The Tribunal held unconstitutional the resolution of the joint chambers of the Supreme Court of 23 January 2020; Kieres dissented.¹⁶ The bench, the reference number of the Supreme Court resolution (BSA I-4110-1/20) and the place of publication of the Tribunal's judgment have not been verified. ⚠ unverified¹⁶ According to the research notes, the Supreme Court resolution concerned benches including judges appointed on the motion of the KRS as reconstituted by the Act of 8 December 2017 and did not directly concern the Tribunal; its text was not retrieved. ⚠ unverified The research notes also mention a decision Kpt 1/20 of 21 April 2020 in a competence dispute (the Sejm and the President of the Republic versus the Supreme Court), but without a retrieved source. ⚠ unverified
• K 1/20 (22 October 2020). A 13-judge bench presided over by Przyłębska, including Pawłowicz, Muszyński, Wyrembak and Piskorski, held by 11 votes to 2 that Art. 4a(1)(2) of the Family Planning Act was unconstitutional; the judgment was published in Dz.U. and took effect on 27 January 2021 (ECtHR, M.L., §§ 15–16, 21, 39, 169).² The names of the two dissenting judges have not been confirmed; the literature names Leon Kieres and Piotr Pszczółkowski. ⚠ unverified²
• P 7/20 (14 July 2021; hearings on 28 April and 14 July 2021). A question of law from the Supreme Court (the chamber has not been confirmed in the source) was heard by Piotrowicz (presiding), Sochański (rapporteur), Jędrzejewski, Piskorski and Stelina.³⁷ Operative part: Art. 4(3), second sentence, TEU read with Art. 279 TFEU is incompatible with Arts. 2, 7, 8(1) and 90(1) read with Art. 4(1) of the Constitution insofar as, in the Tribunal's words, the CJEU "ultra vires" imposes interim measures concerning the organisation and functioning of Polish courts; the principles of primacy and direct application (Art. 91(1)–(3)) do not apply in that respect; the ruling was by majority.³⁷
• K 3/21 (7 October 2021). Application by the Prime Minister; bench of 12: Przyłębska (presiding), Sochański (rapporteur), Jędrzejewski, Muszyński, Pawłowicz, Piotrowicz, Piskorski, Pszczółkowski, Warciński, Wojciechowski, Wyrembak, Zielonacki; dissents: Pszczółkowski and Wyrembak.³⁸ Operative part: (1) Art. 1, first and second subparagraphs, read with Art. 4(3) TEU incompatible with Arts. 2, 8 and 90(1) of the Constitution to the extent described; (2) Art. 19(1), second subparagraph, TEU incompatible with Arts. 2, 7, 8(1), 90(1), 178(1) and 190(1) insofar as it entails disregarding the Constitution or applying provisions repealed or held unconstitutional; (3) Art. 19(1), second subparagraph, read with Art. 2 TEU incompatible with Arts. 2, 8(1), 90(1), 179, 144(3)(17) and 186(1) insofar as it allows review of judicial appointments and KRS resolutions; (4) discontinuance in the remaining scope.³⁸
• K 6/21 (24 November 2021). Application by the Prosecutor General; bench of 5: Przyłębska (presiding), Jędrzejewski, Sochański, Sych (rapporteur), Warciński; unanimous.³⁹ Operative part: (1) Art. 6(1), first sentence, ECHR, insofar as the term "court" covers the Tribunal, is incompatible with Art. 173 read with Art. 10(2), Art. 175(1) and Art. 8(1) of the Constitution; (2) insofar as it empowers the ECtHR to assess the legality of the election of Tribunal judges, it is incompatible with Art. 194(1) read with Art. 8(1); (3) discontinuance in the remaining scope.³⁹
• K 7/21. According to the title of the Tribunal's page, the case concerned review by national or international courts, under Art. 6(1), first sentence, ECHR, of the compatibility with the Constitution and the ECHR of statutes on the organisation of the judiciary, the jurisdiction of courts and the KRS; the date (10 March 2022), bench, operative part and publication have not been verified. ⚠ unverified⁴⁰
• Publication. The Tribunal's English-language pages do not give Dz.U. numbers for K 1/20, P 7/20, K 3/21 and K 6/21.^37,38,39

Findings of other courts on the Tribunal's composition (in brief)

• Xero Flor v. Poland (no. 4907/18). The First Section judgment of 7 May 2021 (deliberated on 30 March 2021) became final on 7 August 2021.²¹ In its account of the facts the ECtHR referred to K 34/15 (§§ 23–26, 28), K 35/15 (§§ 30–35), the refusal to accept the oath from the judges elected on 8 October 2015 (§§ 9, 29) and the Tribunal's position that the President of the Republic was obliged to accept the oath (§ 27).²¹ The conclusion that the bench including Muszyński was not a "tribunal established by law" is confirmed, but the paragraph numbers (§§ 289–291 according to the literature) and the amount of just satisfaction have not been verified. ⚠ unverified^21,16,4
• M.L. v. Poland (no. 40119/21). First Section judgment of 14 December 2023 (deliberated on 21 November 2023): § 169 describes the K 1/20 bench; §§ 170–172 refer to Xero Flor and state that Muszyński's participation in itself may undermine the legal force of a judgment; § 173 concerns Piskorski and Wyrembak.² Under § 174 the K 1/20 judgment did not meet the requirements of the rule of law (without examining the complaints about Przyłębska and Pawłowicz); under § 175 the interference was not "in accordance with the law", and § 176 finds a violation of Art. 8 ECHR.² The applicant claimed EUR 1,220 in pecuniary and EUR 50,000 in non-pecuniary damage (§ 178); the vote and the amounts awarded have not been verified, and separate opinions exist. ⚠ unverified^2,41
• NSA, III OSK 2528/21. A three-judge bench dismissed a cassation appeal by the Chancellery of the Sejm and refused to stay proceedings pending case K 21/19, finding that the Tribunal was “zainfekowany bezprawnością” (“infected with unlawfulness”) through the participation of Muszyński, Piskorski and Wyrembak and citing Xero Flor; the research notes infer the year of that date (16 November 2022) from the article's publication date.⁴²
• CJEU, C-448/23 Commission v. Poland. The Commission decided to bring the action on 15 February 2023 (Reuters), the Advocate General found it well founded in an opinion of 11 March 2025, and judgment was delivered on 18 December 2025; the date on which the action was filed has not been established.^43,44,23 The CJEU held that K 3/21 breached the principle of effective judicial protection and that P 7/20 refused to recognise the binding nature of interim measures, and that because of the appointment of three judges in December 2015 and of the President in December 2016 the Tribunal is not an “independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law”.^23,45 The Tribunal replied that the CJEU has no jurisdiction over it and that the judgment does not affect its functioning.⁴⁶

Disputed points

• Length of the President's term. Six Tribunal judges, Prof. Biernat, most retired judges and Batory Foundation experts relied on the six-year term in Art. 10(2); Przyłębska, Prime Minister Morawiecki and the government spokesperson considered that the office lasted until the end of her term as a judge, and the sources do not identify the provision they relied on.^29,22,31 The sources contain no court ruling on the length of this term.
• Status of the three seats covered by K 34/15 – the legal dispute. The ECtHR held that benches including these persons were not tribunals established by law or fell short of rule-of-law requirements (Xero Flor, M.L.); the NSA (III OSK 2528/21) found the Tribunal “zainfekowany bezprawnością” (“infected with unlawfulness”), and the CJEU (C-448/23) held that the Tribunal is not an independent and impartial tribunal established by law; the Venice Commission stated in October 2016 that there were no vacancies for the December election.^{21,2,42,23,47} In K 6/21 the Tribunal held Art. 6(1) ECHR, insofar as it empowers the ECtHR to assess the legality of the election of Tribunal judges, incompatible with Art. 194(1) read with Art. 8(1) of the Constitution, and the Tribunal's leadership maintained in 2017 that K 34/15 concerned only Article 137, not persons, and that the 8 October 2015 procedure “nie została sfinalizowana” (“was not completed”).^39,48
• Status of the three seats – political positions. According to Wikipedia, PiS described the election of 8 October 2015 in 2015 as a “skok na TK” (a grab at the Tribunal), and Jarosław Kaczyński said in January 2017 that in assessing decisions of the Sejm the Tribunal exceeds its powers.²⁸ According to Wikipedia and Demagog, the Venice Commission said in March 2016 that the conflict over the Tribunal originated in actions of the Sejm of the previous, 7th term, while also calling for the Tribunal's judgments to be respected.^28,49
• EU law and the Constitution. In P 7/20 and K 3/21 the Tribunal held the treaty provisions concerned, understood as described, unconstitutional, and in C-448/23 the CJEU held that these judgments amounted to a failure by Poland to fulfil its obligations; the Tribunal does not accept the CJEU's jurisdiction in this respect.^37,38,23,46
• Age at election. Prof. Chmaj, Prof. Matczak and the opposition objected that Pawłowicz and Piotrowicz were over 65, and PiS called these opinions political; the sources do not name the provision the critics relied on, and in M.L. the ECtHR did not examine the complaints concerning Pawłowicz (§ 174).^18,2
• The President/Vice-President asymmetry. Vice-President Muszyński's office was treated as ended after six years, the President's was not; the sources do not explain on what formal basis the Vice-President's office ended.⁴

Evidentiary gaps

• Sejm resolutions 2018–2022. Apart from Wyrembak (M.P. 2018 item 134), M.P. numbers, Sejm papers and exact dates of the resolutions are missing for Sych and Wojciechowski; dates of oaths before the President of the Republic are known only indirectly from English Wikipedia.^14,4
• Seat assignment. Sych's and Wojciechowski's predecessors, the individual assignment of the Zubik, Tuleja and Rymar seats to Pawłowicz, Piotrowicz and Stelina, and formal confirmation of whose seat Sochański took have not been established.⁴
• Oaths. The oath dates of Zielonacki, Piskorski and Wyrembak and the nominating bodies of Piskorski and Wyrembak have not been established from primary documents; OKO.press reports on the circumstances of Pawłowicz's and Piotrowicz's oath were not checked either.^13,3,18
• The term dispute. The primary text and date of the six judges' first letter, the date of Stelina's letter, the content of the PAP report and the legal reasoning of Przyłębska's side are missing.^29,30,31
• Kp 1/23. The date of the President of the Republic's application, the dates of postponed hearings and the content of M.P. 2023 item 1468 have not been established.^1,36
• Rulings. The full operative part and bench of K 7/21, U 2/20 and Kpt 1/20, the Dz.U. numbers for K 1/20, P 7/20, K 3/21 and K 6/21, and confirmation of who dissented in K 1/20 are missing.^40,16,2
• European judgments. The key paragraphs of Xero Flor and the operative part of M.L. (vote, amounts, names of the authors of separate opinions) were not retrieved, and the state of supervision by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe is known only from Secretariat notes of September 2024, which are not decisions of the Committee.^21,2,41,50
• Regional Administrative Court, 2018. Whether judgment V SA/Wa 459/18 became final, and what happened to the case afterwards, has not been established.⁵¹
• Discrepancies between the notes. (1) The summary of the note on 2018–2023 says only one of the six signatories (Święczkowski) sat in Kp 1/23, but the bench list and the signatory list show two (Jędrzejewski and Święczkowski); the lists were followed.^1,22 (2) The same note gives Wyrembak's election as "January 2018" and, following Polish Wikipedia, says the opposition voted against, while the Sejm API record shows 26 January 2018 with 25 votes against and 205 not voting; the Sejm API was followed.^3,16 (3) OKO.press refers to "230 PiS MPs" voting for the three candidates of 21 November 2019, while English Wikipedia gives Stelina 233 votes; individual figures are given.^18,4 (4) The notes date the end of the President's six-year term once to 20 December and once to 20 or 21 December 2022; 20 December was used, following Rzeczpospolita.²⁹ (5) Xero Flor became final on 7 August 2021 according to the HUDOC header, but on 8 August 2021 according to the Committee of Ministers Secretariat notes; the HUDOC date was used.^21,50 (6) One note dates the adoption of the Tribunal's Rules (M.P. 2017 item 767) to 27 July 2017 (from the ELI database), another, as a supposition, to 3 July 2017; 27 July was used.^8,52