Aggregated public profile · Not an official account.

The author of the entry r00t accused Leśkiewicz of being evasive and possibly not understanding his own argumentation. He pointed out that Article 7, point 13 of the Public Procurement Law defined critical services, but — in his opinion — did not constitute grounds for refusing to provide public information. He emphasized that it concerned the total cost of the event, not the protection procedures for Nawrocki, and asked how revealing just the amount could threaten national security. He added that Leśkiewicz and the law office might not see the difference between protecting sensitive information and the obligation to account for public expenditures, or they chose to hide something from the Polish people. #Prawo #Transparentność #FinansePubliczne (translated)

The author of the post accused Pobożego of hypocrisy in accusing Donald Tusk of preparing a "year of hate," hatred, and political war. He claimed that for weeks Nawrocki and his entourage have been confronting the government: Bogucki publishes attacks on the Prime Minister and ministers almost daily, and similar statements are shared by the official account of the President's Chancellery. According to the author, Nawrocki presents the government's actions as a threat to Poland while simultaneously calling for dialogue and an end to the political war. The author also undermined the foundations of Pobożego's accusations, pointing to anonymous sources in the Prime Minister's Office. He accused Nawrocki's environment of fueling the conflict and accusing opponents while portraying themselves as victims. He called on Pobożego to respond to the statements of Bogucki, Nawrocki, and other representatives of this environment, and accused them of silencing their own involvement in escalating the dispute. #Polska #Polityka #Hipokryzja (translated)

The author of the post accused Karol Nawrocki of hypocrisy and trying to present himself as a victim of political attacks, while simultaneously overlooking the involvement of his associates in escalating the conflict. He wrote that he had been observing the publications of Nawrocki's associates for weeks, particularly Bogucki, in which—he claimed—they attacked the Prime Minister, ministers, and the government, accusing them of incompetence and destroying the state. He added that the day before, the head of the President's Chancellery called Donald Tusk the worst Prime Minister of the Third Republic and the Minister of Finance the worst Minister of Finance of the Third Republic. The author also questioned Nawrocki's claim that the government was focusing on him instead of dealing with the state's problems. The writer asked whether the head of the Chancellery acted without Nawrocki's knowledge, pointing out that the official account of the President's Chancellery was disseminating his statements. He assessed that presenting one's own environment as an innocent observer was an attempt to shift responsibility onto the government. The author wrote that he expected truthfulness, responsibility, and consistency between words and actions from the President. He added that respect for the office does not automatically mean respect for the person who holds it, and in the end, he accused Nawrocki of manipulating citizens. #Polska #Polityka #Hipokryzja (translated)

The author turned to Pereira, claiming that the provision he cited distinguishes between the selection of a judge and the establishment of an employment relationship. He wrote that the Sejm selects the judge, and the oath conditions the establishment of the employment relationship, while the president does not confirm the Sejm's choice. He concluded that Pereira undermined his own argument and stated that Berek is a judge of the Constitutional Tribunal. #prawo #sędzia #TrybunałKonstytucyjny (translated)

The author of the entry questioned Bogucki's reasoning regarding the refusal of the president to take the oath and the actions of the management of the Constitutional Tribunal's Chancellery. He indicated that it concerns separate legal issues related to different entities and their competencies. He referred to Article 194 paragraph 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland and Articles 4 and 5 of the Act on the Status of Judges of the Constitutional Tribunal, as well as to the judgment of the Tribunal in case K 34/15. As he wrote, the Tribunal recognized in it that taking the oath from a properly elected judge is the president's obligation. He added that even assuming that the oath taken in the Sejm was ineffective, it would not automatically exclude the legal assessment of Nawrocki's previous inaction. The author stated that there is no logical contradiction here and accused Bogucki of reducing two separate issues to a single political slogan. #prawo #konstytucja #Polska (translated)

The author turned to Wójcik, claiming that Maciej Berek was appointed as a judge of the Constitutional Tribunal in accordance with Article 194 paragraph 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, by virtue of the resolution of the Sejm dated September 4, 2026. He wrote that Wójcik's remarks have no legal significance, do not invalidate the resolution, nor do they take away Berek's status as a person elected to that position. He added that the constitutional rights of the Sejm do not depend on Wójcik's approval or the political expectations of his group. #TrybunałKonstytucyjny #Konstytucja #Sejm (translated)

The author of the entry accused Bogucki of presenting a selective interpretation of the Polish Constitution, omitting provisions regarding Poland's obligation to respect binding international law. He pointed to articles 9, 87, 90, and 91, which—he wrote—relate, among other things, to ratified international agreements, the transfer of certain competencies to international organizations, and the place of international law in the Polish legal order. The author assessed that the lack of mention of tribunals and commissions in articles 8 and 87 does not undermine the competencies of these institutions, as they arise from relevant international agreements. He added that the supremacy of the Constitution in the domestic legal order does not mean that Poland can ignore its commitments or rulings issued within recognized jurisdiction. He addressed Bogucki as the head of Nawrocki's Chancellery and a lawyer, accusing him of presenting the content of the fundamental law to citizens in an unreliable manner. He emphasized that the Constitution is not limited to article 8 and should not be interpreted according to political expectations. #Konstytucja #Prawo #Polska (translated)

The author of the entry accused Waldemar of omitting Article 154, paragraph 3 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. He wrote that if the first attempt to appoint a government failed, the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers would be elected by the Sejm, and the President would be obliged to appoint them. He emphasized that the President would not have the right of veto in this procedure and indicated that this happened in 2023. The author also considered the possibility that Nawrocki would refuse to take the oath, similar to the case of the oath of judges of the Constitutional Tribunal. He assessed that this would lead to a serious constitutional crisis since the Constitution did not provide a straightforward mechanism for forcing the President to perform this duty. He added that based on Article 162, paragraph 3, the outgoing government could continue to perform its duties despite the Sejm electing a new cabinet. He pointed out that such a scenario would mean that the body responsible for ensuring compliance with the Constitution could prevent the execution of its provisions. #Konstytucja #Polska #KryzysPolityczny (translated)

The author of the entry criticized Karol Nawrocki for selectively referencing the Constitution of the Republic of Poland and accused him and Bogucki of omitting provisions related to international law. He pointed to articles 87, 9, 90, and 91, which—he wrote—are significant for understanding the sources of law and Poland's obligations. The author argued that Article 87 defines the sources of law, not the institutions authorized to interpret it. He also noted that the opinions of the Venice Commission are not legally binding, whereas the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights and the rulings of the Court of Justice of the EU are subject to different principles arising from Poland's treaty obligations. He reminded that according to Article 126, paragraph 2, Nawrocki, while performing the duties of the President of the Republic of Poland, was to ensure compliance with the Constitution. He accused him of undermining the integrity of fulfilling this duty by omitting parts of its provisions. #KonstytucjaRP #Prawo #Polska (translated)

The author of the entry addressed Daniel Obajtek with questions about the audit of Orlen no. 238/2018, which he wrote indicated that the actions of the then management could have reduced the company's revenue by around 112 million zlotys. He asked whether during Obajtek's presidency, which began in February 2018, the findings of the audit were forwarded to the prosecutor's office, analyzed in terms of Article 296 of the Penal Code, and whether any explanatory actions were taken. The author reminded that the investigation into fuel price manipulation in 2023 was initiated on January 17, 2024, at the District Prosecutor's Office in Płock, and in April 2024, the prosecutor's office informed about searches at Obajtek's home in matters concerning Orlen. He assessed that Minister Żurek did not initiate this investigation, contrary to the impression that the entry by Obajtek could have created. He added that manually setting fuel prices is not a crime, and criminal liability depends on specific circumstances and the fulfillment of statutory prerequisites. According to the author, comparing the two cases solely based on the price-setting mechanism does not determine their legal assessment. He wrote that the publication of excerpts from the audit does not undermine the validity of the investigation concerning 2023 but raises questions about the actions of Orlen's management regarding the audit findings during Obajtek's presidency. #Orlen #audyt #przemysł (translated)

The author r00t🇪🇺 accused Bogucki of selective representation of the Constitutional Tribunal's ruling from December 3, 2015, in case K 34/15. He pointed out that Article 194, paragraph 1 of the Constitution entrusts the Sejm with the election of judges of the Tribunal, while the obligation to take an oath before the President results from the law. He referred to points 8.5.1, 8.5.3, and 8.6 of the justification. As he wrote, the Tribunal considered the oath to be an element added by the legislator to the constitutional procedure, and its acceptance by the President was regarded as an obligation. He added that the Tribunal questioned the interpretation of provisions that would not foresee the immediate taking of an oath. The author assessed that the President does not approve the choice made by the Sejm and cannot, based on statutory competence, co-decide on the composition of the Tribunal. He accused Bogucki of omitting parts of the ruling and using it to provoke opposition to the government and to present its actions as an attack on the constitutional order. Referring to Karol Nawrocki, the author reminded that Article 126, paragraph 1 of the Constitution defines the President of the Republic of Poland as the highest representative of the state and the guarantor of continuity of power, while paragraph 3 indicates that he performs his tasks on the principles specified in the Constitution and laws. He wrote that using the authority of the Constitution to justify a political position does not correspond to those obligations. #Konstytucja #Prawo #Polityka (translated)

The author of the entry r00t wrote that the document commented on by Wójcik contradicted his assertion that Maciej Berek did not meet the formal requirements. According to the author, the Chancellery of the Sejm indicated that the application with Berek's candidacy was submitted on time by an eligible entity and contained the required elements, after which it was referred to the Justice and Human Rights Committee. The author added that during the committee meeting, Berek's performance of the legal advisor profession was discussed, and the candidate answered questions. The committee positively assessed his candidacy. r00t accused Wójcik of ignoring the course of the procedure and the documents, which — as he wrote — indicated something contrary to his assertion. #Polska #Prawo #KomisjaSprawiedliwości (translated)

The author of the entry assessed that Nawrocki was not a "guardian of the Constitution" and accused him of attempting to ascribe to himself competencies that, according to the author, the fundamental law did not grant him. He wrote that merely invoking the Constitution during conferences and political disputes did not mean defending it, and it should also be respected when its provisions were politically inconvenient. He added that Nawrocki was not a ruler, and the Constitution should not be treated as a private regulation of his power. He concluded his assessment with a critical comment. #Konstytucja #Prawo #Polityka (translated)

The author accused Bogucki of incorrectly asserting that in Poland no one can become a judge without taking an oath before the president. He wrote that he did not know whether it was Bogucki's interpretation or that of Karol Nawrocki, and he cited Article 194, paragraph 1 of the Constitution. According to the author, judges of the Constitutional Tribunal are chosen by the Sejm, and the president does not have constitutional powers to appoint or approve them. The author emphasized that the obligation to take an oath before the president arises from the law, not from the Constitution. He claimed that the president merely receives the oath, and the oath itself does not create the judge's mandate. He also referenced the Constitutional Tribunal's ruling in case K 34/15, which — as he wrote — clarified that the taking of the oath does not imply the president's involvement in shaping the Tribunal's composition. Finally, he criticized Bogucki for, in his opinion, presenting the Constitution according to the political needs of the President's Chancellery. #Konstytucja #TrybunałKonstytucyjny #Polska (translated)

The author criticized Dubyna's post, accusing him of misrepresenting the division of powers, the competences of the Council of Ministers, the rulings of the Constitutional Tribunal, and the concept of a coup d'état. He wrote that the appointed team analyzing the systemic effects of the court and tribunal rulings did not seize judicial power and had no authority to overturn judgments, change decision-making panels, or issue orders to judges. The author stated that Dubyna referred to Article 190 of the Constitution while omitting the difference between the finality of Constitutional Tribunal rulings and the analysis of their legal effects. He also accused him of failing to take into account the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Xero Flor v. Poland and the Court of Justice of the European Union in case C-448/23, which — as he wrote — concerned fundamental irregularities in the functioning of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal. The author considered the designation of the appointment of the government analytical team as a coup d'état to be a manifestation of a misunderstanding of the principles of state functioning. He also criticized the comparison of the situation to a totalitarian system, stating that it was historically unfounded and offensive to those repressed by the communist state. He added that the use of capital letters and exclamation marks did not lend any legal or intellectual value to the statements. #prawo #konstytucja #Polska (translated)

The author of the entry, r00t, criticized MP Smoliński for the announcement of holding police officers accountable after next year's elections. He claimed that the words about remembering the face of every officer could have a coercive character and called on the relevant authorities to assess them for potential criminal liability. He recalled Article 190 § 1 and Article 224 § 2 of the Penal Code, concerning — as he pointed out — punishable threats and unlawful threats used to influence the actions of a public official. He clarified that he did not preclude whether the MP's statement meets the criteria of those offenses. The author appealed for any potential abuse of powers by police officers to be reported through the proper authorities and procedures, rather than announcing political retaliation. He also referred to Article 104 § 2 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland and the parliamentary oath. He wrote that the words of the parliamentarian could have been perceived by participants in the demonstration as an endorsement for intimidating police officers, and emphasized that the events outside the Constitutional Tribunal did not place demonstrators or MPs above the law. #prawo #obowiązek #polityka (translated)

The author of the post urged Bogucki, the head of the President's Chancellery, to refrain from publicly humiliating representatives of his own country. He wrote that Bogucki's subsequent posts and interviews, focused on Donald Tusk and the government, have ceased to resemble constructive political criticism and have begun to resemble a personal obsession. The author assessed that Bogucki's statements do not undermine the international position or reputation of the Prime Minister, but provide testimony of himself and the Chancellery he represents. He added that portraying Tusk as a fraud and a liar mocks Bogucki and his surroundings. #Polityka #DonaldTusk #KancelariaPrezydenta (translated)

The author criticized Szefernaker's post, stating that instead of calming emotions, it served political mobilization. He pointed out that Szefernaker began with the story of a voter who traveled half of Poland to cast his vote for him, and then — as the author put it — presented Donald Tusk as an unscrupulous salesman, Poland as a state of chaos and high prices, and suggested a political nature to the accusations and arrests. The author also noted the announcement to remove Tusk's government from power within a year. He emphasized that Szefernaker wrote as the head of the Chancellery of the President of the Republic of Poland, while also reminding of his role in Karol Nawrocki's campaign, whom he referred to as a civic candidate. The author accused the Presidential Chancellery and politicians associated with Nawrocki of inconsistency: on one hand, they were supposed to call for an end to political war and calm the mood, while on the other hand — according to the author — they were stoking conflict, presenting government decisions as threats, and mobilizing voters against it. In this context, he recalled statements from Bogucki and Nawrocki about the need to ease tensions. The author noted that the efficiency of the state is not measured solely by the number of accusations or arrests, but added that it should not also depend on whether those in power are protected from responsibility. He assessed that merely labeling the accusations as political does not prove that they had such a nature and announced that he would remind of earlier statements every time the Presidential Chancellery calls for an end to the political conflict. #Polska #Polityka #Emocje (translated)