Search

The dispute between Deputy Minister of Defense Cezary Tomczyk and the President's Office concerns the non-disclosure of the costs of the event organized by Karol Nawrocki on the anniversary of the president's inauguration, raising questions about the transparency of public spending. #Polityka #InformacjaPubliczna #Wydarzenia (translated)

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)

Aleksandra wrote that if the President's Office claims that it cannot receive the oath again because the judges have already taken it, then it admits that the oath has taken place. In her opinion, there is no basis for blocking the judges from adjudicating. She also mentioned her fascination with horses and criticized this approach, stating that one should not "fight with logic." #polityka #sędziowie #logika (translated)

Piotr Kusznieruk questioned whether the Sejm documented the verification of Maciej Berek's qualifications for selection to the Constitutional Tribunal. He wrote that Andrzej Filipowicz requested documents from the Chancellery of the Sejm and the Justice and Human Rights Committee, but the received response — according to Filipowicz’s account — did not mention documents from the bar association confirming Berek's qualifications and experience. Kusznieruk pointed out a discrepancy between Sejm print number 3006 from August 14, 2026, which stated that Berek had been practicing as a legal advisor since 2001 and actively for 25 years, and a certificate from OIRP in Warsaw dated September 3, 2026. According to the data he cited, Berek was entered on the list on June 26, 2002, and obtained his qualifications after taking the oath on September 25, 2002. The certificate listed the periods of registered legal practice from January 1, 2006, to July 31, 2009, and from August 1, 2012, to the date of issuance but did not include a list of civil law contracts. The author quoted responses from the Senate Chancellery and the Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights, according to which Berek did not hold the position of legal advisor there nor provided legal assistance in that role. The Supreme Audit Office informed, however, that he was a legal advisor and performed duties aligned with the tasks of advisors, although the appointment of a controller as a legal advisor was not possible. Kusznieruk emphasized that the legal qualification of this work and the declared civil law contracts remained in dispute. According to Filipowicz's summary, if the two periods of Berek's work as a legal advisor in NIK are counted, his tenure was 1,345 days, or about 3 years and 8 months; without those periods, it was 387 days related to running a law office. Kusznieruk noted that this was an analysis of available materials and not a binding decision regarding the failure to meet the requirements. He called for determining who in the Sejm was responsible for verification and what documents were examined, indicating that any potential criminal liability under Article 231 § 1 or § 3 of the Penal Code would require demonstrating statutory prerequisites. #TrybunałKonstytucyjny #Prawo #InformacjaPubliczna (translated)

In a debate organized by PAP Biznes and the Polish Bank Association, participants emphasized the need to protect consumers not only in relations with banks but also in interactions with law firms pursuing claims, pointing to the necessity of introducing transparent cooperation rules and more effective regulations in the compensation industry. #ochronakonsumentów #bankowość #roszczenia (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 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)

Jacek Fogiel wrote that in connection with the interview with Nawrocki, it was said that the Office of the President forbade Polsat from asking about horses. He was ironic, calling it "reliable journalism" and describing the situation as a circus. #dziennikarstwo #Polska #media (translated)

Aleksander Twardowski wrote that MP Kamil Wnuk responded to his question about renting a car, but the amounts and facts provided by him differed from the information from the Chancellery of the Sejm. Twardowski informed that yesterday he requested the Chancellery to audit the contracts of the MP. He added that if it turns out that Wnuk settled a higher amount than he actually spent, he would notify the prosecutor's office. The Chancellery had previously conducted a similar audit regarding Adam Gomoła. Twardowski also wrote that Poland 2050 informed him via email that it would not disclose the contract register with complete data of the parties. He declared that upon receiving a written refusal with justification, he would take the matter to court. He accused Katarzyna Pełczyńska and Szymon Hołownia of not wanting to reveal how public money is spent and described such actions as a violation of the law. He also informed that the day before yesterday he submitted a request to the Left for the disclosure of the full, non-anonymized register of contracts concluded since the beginning of the term. He expected a refusal and announced that he would promptly appeal it to the court. Finally, he recommended the Citizens' Network and encouraged financial support for it. #FinansePubliczne #Jawność #Prawo (translated)

Ronen Bar is demanding compensation of 3 million shekels (approximately 3.8 million PLN) and accuses the Prime Minister of trying to shift the responsibility for the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, onto him. Bar also proposed preemptive strikes on Hamas leaders. Bar also challenged Netanyahu's claims that the Prime Minister's office had not received any signals before the attack itself. Bar called on the Prime Minister to disclose documents related to those events and to refrain from invoking immunity. #Izrael #Netanjahu #Hamas (translated)

Jacek Fogiel wrote that Nawrocki's Chancellery announced that the president will not go to Slovenia on Thursday because he has to defend the PiS politician Święczkowski. He added that the president also wanted to go horse riding, and the weather was supposed to be nice. #Polska #polityka #prezydent (translated)

There are immense doubts as to whether Minister Berek has a ten-year tenure as a legal advisor. After Maciej Berek was elected by the Sejm as a judge of the Constitutional Tribunal on September 4, the office of President Karol Nawrocki sent a letter to the Sejm office regarding "the clarification of the circumstances of the formal candidacy procedure" for Berek, and the head of the presidential office, Zbigniew Bogucki, stated that "there are immense doubts as to whether Minister Berek has a ten-year tenure as a legal advisor." #TrybunałKonstytucyjny #ślubowanie #Polska (translated)

Author r00t🇪🇺 accused Bogucki of omitting the Constitution, the hierarchy of legal sources, and circumstances in his interpretation that—according to the author—did not fit his thesis. He reminded that according to Article 194(1) of the Constitution, judges of the Constitutional Tribunal are elected by the Sejm, and the president has no right to approve this election or politically verify it. According to the author, Article 4(1) of the Act on the Status of Judges of the CT concerned the taking of an oath but did not grant the president the right of veto. The author cited the judgment of the CT K 34/15 from December 3, 2015, stating that the Tribunal recognized that the lack of a statutory deadline for taking an oath means an obligation to act without delay, with the possibility of considering exceptional, objective circumstances. He questioned Bogucki's argument about the change of law and urged him to specify a particular normative change that would justify departing from this interpretation. He added that the fundamental structure of the oath before the president remained unchanged, as did Article 194(1) of the Constitution. Discussing the judgment K 3/26 from May 12, 2026, the author pointed out that Justyn Piskorski sat in the adjudicating panel, whose status—he wrote—was linked to the flawed composition of the CT considered by the ECtHR in the case of Xero Flor v. Poland. He also accused Bogucki of failing to mention the publication of the judgment in the Journal of Laws, required—according to the author—by Article 190(2) of the Constitution. The author also recalled the dissenting opinions of Rafał Wojciechowski and Jarosław Wyrembak. According to his account, Wojciechowski accused the majority of going beyond the limits of the request and creating a norm contrary to Article 194(1) of the Constitution, while Wyrembak questioned the sentence and pointed to the obligation to take the oath as a consequence of the obligation to submit it. The author also noted that the justification of K 3/26 referred to extraordinary, objective, and justified circumstances, not to the unlimited political freedom of the president. Questioning Article 5 of the Act on the Status of Judges of the CT, the author stated that adopting Bogucki’s interpretation could mean granting the president an actual ability to block the effects of the election made by the Sejm. He urged him to indicate a provision of the Constitution establishing such a competence. He added that Article 126 does not constitute a blanket authorization for extending the president's powers, and its paragraph 3 specifies that the president performs tasks on the principles laid down in the Constitution and laws. Finally, the author accused Bogucki of selective use of provisions and case law. He wrote that the lack of a statutory deadline does not grant the president the right to indefinitely block the constitutional competences of the Sejm. #Konstytucja #Prawo #Polska (translated)

As presidential spokesperson Rafał Leśkiewicz indicated earlier, Maciej Berek does not meet the formal requirements for the TC judge, and the Office of the President is waiting for the appropriate documents from the Chancellery of the Sejm that would clarify these doubts. #TrybunałKonstytucyjny #Sędziowie #PolitykaPolska (translated)

"There are huge doubts as to whether Minister Berek has ten years of experience as a legal advisor." The office of President Karol Nawrocki sent a letter to the Chancellery of the Sejm regarding "clarifying the circumstances of the formal processing of Berek's candidacy," and the head of the presidential office, Zbigniew Bogucki, stated that "there are huge doubts as to whether Minister Berek has ten years of experience as a legal advisor." #MaciejBerek #TrybunałKonstytucyjny #ślubowanie (translated)