Poland

Go to general description

The Republic of Poland is a unitary state and a constitutional republic with a mixture of presidential and parliamentary models. The system of government is based on the separation of and balance between the legislative, executive and judicial powers. On the basis of the administrative reform of 1998, the country is divided into 16 provinces ("województwa") which are the main administrative units. The provinces are divided into "poviats". The basic unit of local self-government is a commune ("gmina").

Legislative power is exercised by the Parliament, composed of the Sejm (Seym) with 460 seats and the Senate with 100 seats. Each chamber is elected to a four-year term. Elections to the Sejm are universal, equal, direct and proportional and are conducted by secret ballot. Elections to the Senate are universal, direct and are conducted by secret ballot. The Supreme Court adjudicates upon the validity of the elections to the Sejm and the Senate.

The executive authority in Poland is vested in the President of the Republic of Poland and the Council of Ministers.

The President is the supreme representative of the Republic of Poland and the guarantor of the continuity of State authority. The President is elected by the Nation, in universal, equal and direct elections, conducted by secret ballot. The President is elected for a five-year term of office and may be only be re-elected for one more term. The Council of Ministers composed of the President of the Council of Ministers (Prime Minister) and ministers manages the government administration. The President of the Republic nominates a Prime Minister who than proposes the composition of a Council of Ministers. Vice-presidents of the Council of Ministers (Deputy Prime Ministers) and presidents of committees specified in statutes can also be appointed within the Council of Ministers.

The administration of justice in the Republic of Poland is implemented by the Supreme Court, the common courts, administrative courts and military courts. The common courts in Poland are district courts ("rejon"), provincial courts ("okręg") and the courts of appeal. They are competent to hear criminal law cases, civil law cases, family and custody law cases, labour law cases and social insurance cases. All court proceedings should have at least two stages. Judges are appointed for an indefinite period by the President of the Republic on the motion of the National Council of the Judiciary and are not removable. The military courts are the military unit courts and the military provincial courts. They have judiciary control within the Polish Army in criminal cases and other cases subscribed to them by relevant statutes.

The Supreme Court is the highest central judicial organ in the Republic of Poland. It exercises supervision over common and military courts regarding judgements and also performs other activities specified in the Constitution and the statutes. The Supreme Court is the highest court of appeal.

The Chief Administrative Court has jurisdiction over cases of administrative justice. This court operates through 10 delegated centres of the same Court. The Chief Administrative Court and other administrative courts exercise, to the extent specified by statute, control over the performance of public/governmental administration and settle jurisdictional disputes between units of local self-government and units of government administration.

The Constitutional Tribunal is an organ of the judiciary competent to decide the conformity of the issued law with the Constitution, disputes concerning competence between the organs of central administration, the conformity of the political parties tasks with the Constitution and to hear constitutional complaints filed by citizens.

Legal system and Constitution. The National Assembly - made up of the two chambers of Parliament, the Sejm and the Senate - approved the final draft of the country's first post-communist Constitution on April 2, 1997. After the Supreme Court upheld the validity of the referendum, and President Aleksander Kwasniewski signed it into law, the new constitution came into effect on October 17, 1997.

The sources of Polish law are divided into two categories: universally binding law and internal law. According to the Constitution, the sources of universally binding Polish law are: the Constitution itself as the supreme law of the land, the statutory law ("ustawa") and ratified international agreements and regulations (“rozporządzenie”). Also local organs, on the basis provided in the statute and within the limits prescribed in the statute, can create the universally binding law (local law). The acts of local law are binding within the territory where the issuing organ exercises its powers.

ODIHR Legal Reviews, Assessments

Variety of useful resources and tools prepared by ODIHR to support legal reform in OSCE participating States. It includes legal reviews of draft and exisiting national legislation and assessments of legislative process.

Opinions

2024-04-08

Jak podkreślano w poprzednich opiniach Biura Instytucji Demokratycznych i Praw Człowieka OBWE (ODIHR) na temat reformy sądownictwa w Polsce w latach 2017-2023, każde państwo ma prawo do reformy ustroju sądownictwa, ale takie zmiany powinny zawsze wpisywać się w wymogi konstytucyjne danego kraju, zasady praworządności, przepisy prawa międzynarodowego i standardy praw człowieka, a także być zgodne ze zobowiązaniami OBWE. Polski ustawodawca powinien kierować się tymi podstawowymi zasadami przy wyborze rozwiązań prawodawczych mających na celu wykonanie wyroków przeciwko Polsce dotyczących niezależności sądownictwa. W związku z tym, w odniesieniu do inicjatywy reformy Krajowej Rady Sądownictwa (KRS), ważne jest, aby tryb reformowania KRS można było należycie uzasadnić w świetle prawa międzynarodowego i standardów praw człowieka, a projektodawcy nie powoływali się bezkrytycznie na istnienie wyjątkowych okoliczności w celu usprawiedliwienia nadzwyczajnych środków – może to bowiem stwarzać ryzyko ustanowienia precedensu, w którym nieakceptująca reformy partia polityczna miałaby pokusę postępowania w ten sam sposób po uzyskaniu większości.

Złożoność i skala reformy wymaganej w celu wyeliminowania systemowych problemów sądownictwa w Polsce, wskazanych przez Europejski Trybunał Praw Człowieka (ETPC), Trybunał Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej (TSUE), organizacje międzynarodowe, w tym ODIHR, a także obserwatorów krajowych, wymaga opracowania przemyślanej i spójnej polityki, na której oparty byłby cały proces zmiany. W tym kontekście reforma KRS powinna być jednym z priorytetów, ponieważ obecne rozwiązanie prawne, zgodnie z którym sędziowie-członkowie KRS są wybierani przez Sejm (niższą izbę parlamentu), stanowi jedną z dysfunkcji strukturalnych, która doprowadziła między innymi do powstania systemowych wad reżimu powoływania sędziów. Brak pilnego rozwiązania może zaś tę sytuację jeszcze bardziej pogorszyć. Sekwencyjne podejście do reformy może być zatem uzasadnione w obecnych warunkach, o ile towarzyszy mu dogłębna refleksja oraz szerszy, konstruktywny, inkluzywny i partycypacyjny proces reform legislacyjnych, który będzie adresował strukturalne i systemowe problemy sądownictwa w bardziej kompleksowy, dogłębny i systematyczny sposób.

W tym kontekście z zadowoleniem należy przyjąć fakt, że projekt ustawy o zmianie ustawy o Krajowej Radzie Sądownictwa („projekt ustawy”) ponownie wprowadza zasadę wyboru sędziów-członków KRS przez środowisko sędziowskie, aby przywrócić niezależność KRS zgodnie z postulatami ETPC i rekomendacjami opracowanymi na szczeblu międzynarodowym i regionalnym. Ponadto należy zwrócić uwagę na pozytywne aspekty szeregu przepisów projektu ustawy, które uwzględniają niektóre z zaleceń sformułowanych przez ODIHR w opiniach z lat 2017-2023, w szczególności dotyczących reprezentatywności ogółu sądownictwa w KRS, otwartości i przejrzystości wyboru sędziów-członków oraz chęci zwiększenia udziału społeczeństwa w procesach KRS.

2024-04-08

As underlined in previous ODIHR opinions on judicial reform in Poland in 2017-2023, while every state has the right to reform its judicial system, such reforms should always comply with the country’s constitutional requirements, adhere to the rule of law principles, be compliant with international law and human rights standards, as well as OSCE commitments. These underlying principles should
guide the legislative choices to be made by the Polish legislators to execute the judgments against Poland concerning judicial independence. Therefore, with respect to the reform initiative addressing the National Council of the Judiciary (NCJ), it is important that the modalities of reforming the NCJ can be duly justified in light of international law and human rights standards, and that the legal drafters do not lightly invoke the existence of exceptional circumstances to resort to extraordinary measures, as this may run the risk of setting a precedent whereby a changing political majority, which did not approve of the reform, would be tempted to proceed the same way.
The complexity and scale of the reform required to address the systemic deficiencies of the judicial system in Poland as identified by the European Court of Human Right (ECtHR), the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), international organizations, including ODIHR, as well as national observers, requires elaboration of a thorough and coherent policy underpinning the entire reform process. In this context, the reform of the NCJ should be among the
priorities as the existing legal arrangement of electing the judge members of the NCJ by the Sejm (lower house of the Parliament) constitutes one of the structural dysfunctions which, among others, has led to systemic deficiencies of the judicial appointment system and may further aggravate the situation if not rapidly addressed. A sequenced approach to reform efforts could thus be justifiable in the present circumstances, providing that it is accompanied by an in-depth reflection and a broader, meaningful, inclusive and participatory legislative reform process with a view to address the structural and systemic deficiencies of the judicial system in a more comprehensive, in-depth and systematic manner.
In this context, it is welcome that the Bill Amending the Act on the National Council of the Judiciary of Poland (the Bill) reinstates the principle of s/election of judge members of the NCJ by their peers to restore the NCJ’s independence as exhorted by the ECtHR and in accordance with recommendations elaborated at the international and regional levels. In addition, a number of provisions of the Bill contain positive aspects that address some of the recommendations made by ODIHR in its 2017-2023 opinions, particularly with respect to the representativeness of the judiciary at large within the NCJ, the openness and
transparency of the election of the judge members and willingness to enhance public inclusion in the processes of the NCJ.

Show all 38 more documents

Comments

No documents

Show all 4 more documents

Others

No documents

Legislation

Constitution

Variety of useful resources and tools prepared by ODIHR to support legal reform in OSCE participating States. It includes legal reviews of draft and exisiting national legislation and assessments of legislative process.

Show all 13 more documents

Legislation

Criminal codes

National legislative acts on a range of human dimension issues. It offers access to full-text documents, as well as summaries of and excerpts from national constitutions, primary and secondary legislation and case-law from across the OSCE region.

Legislation

Primary and Secondary

National legislative acts on a range of human dimension issues. It offers access to full-text documents, as well as summaries of and excerpts from national constitutions, primary and secondary legislation and case-law from across the OSCE region.

Show all 54 more documents

International standards

National legislative acts on a range of human dimension issues. It offers access to full-text documents, as well as summaries of and excerpts from national constitutions, primary and secondary legislation and case-law from across the OSCE region.

Case-law

Case law subline. Status of Ratification of the Main International Human Rights Treaties, Conventions and other instruments. International Case-law for selected topics.

National

No documents

Back to top