The author of the entry accused Horała of assessing the case of Maciej Berek's election to the Constitutional Tribunal without a full analysis of the regulations. He referred to Article 194, paragraph 1 of the Constitution, which — as he wrote — assigns the election of TC judges to the Sejm, and Article 4 of the law, which regulates the taking of the oath but does not give the president the right to approve or annul the election. On this basis, he concluded that Berek is a TC judge. The author admitted that the law provides for the oath to be taken before the president, but questioned whether refusal or failure to designate a date could indefinitely block the commencement of office by a person elected by the Sejm. He also pointed to ruling K 34/15, which, according to him, required the oath to be taken without delay, except in exceptional, objective circumstances. At the same time, he noted that the effectiveness of Berek's oath in the presence of the Speaker of the Sejm remains a matter of interpretative dispute. However, he deemed it unacceptable to present presidential inaction as an unlimited constitutional authority. The author called on Horała to present a full analysis of Berek's qualifications and documents confirming his professional experience, referring to the allegation of failing to meet the conditions from Article 3 of the law. He also asked whether the support declared by Horała for the president in this dispute could be reconciled with the postulate of TC independence, emphasizing that — as he wrote — the Constitution binds both the Sejm and the president. #Konstytucja #SądRejonowy #Prawo (translated)
