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)
