The president signed it, but at the same time decided to send it to the Constitutional Court. In the legal community, it's boiled, and the state's head hasn't been dry.
– In view of the doubts surrounding the correctness of the procedure for passing the abovementioned laws, i.e. the absence of the anticipation for Members of the Sejm to take part in the work of these laws by Mr Kamiński and Mr Maciej Wąsik, the president decided to mention the above laws in a follow-up review to the Constitutional Court in order to examine their compliance with the Constitution. akin actions will be taken by the president of the Republic of Poland whenever Members are prevented from exercising their mandate, coming from the general election – reads the Communication Chancellery of the president of Poland.
– The budget was signed and that was it. The remainder doesn't matter. Money goes to people, nothing stops it – bloomed Donald Tusk Twitter.
Professor Zoll there are no illusions: – The president assumes that unless there are 460 Members in the Chamber, the bill cannot be passed. However, the reality is that usually individual is missing – justified or not. The indication that specified action (referring the Sejm's laws to the TK) will be analogous is even more dangerous. This is crazy, paralyzing the state! – the expert thundered.
– The President's announcement of directing all the laws in follow-up to the Constitutional Court will make it hard to regulation but will not prevent it. The government may not accept decisions which will be issued by alleged double judges – considers Krzysztof Izdebski, lawyer, expert of the Stefan Batory Foundation, with whom Dziennik.pl spoke.
Sir @AndrzejDuda A convicted criminal Kaminski tells you that voting on a budget bill without 224 Members is legal. Thank him.
pic.twitter.com/Dsiel9RiHf
— Szarapolka Ewa February 1, 2024
– Even if the Constitutional Tribunal decides that there have been procedural irregularities due to the absence of 2 Members, specified a conviction may stay unfulfilled. The same is actual of many another judgments of the Constitutional Tribunal, as can be seen in the yearly reports of this institution. There is besides no legal mechanics to enforce liability for failure to comply with the judgement of the Constitutional Tribunal – notes Prof. Jacek Zalesny, a constitutionalist from the University of Warsaw, with whom “Rzeczpospolita” spoke.
– Logically speaking, this is simply a proceeding that is fundamentally incorrect. due to the fact that if the president had doubts about the constitutional compatibility of the budget bill, he should have sent it to the TK before signing it. – he told Onet Dr Marcin Krzemiński, a constitutionalist from the Jagiellonian University.
In a akin speech in conversation with Interia.pl spoke Prof. Marek Chmaj: – The Constitutional Court has no time limit for examining the President's proposal – it may as well deal with it in a fewer weeks, as well as in a fewer years (...). The president shows here two-fold – or alternatively two-faced – behaviour. On the 1 hand, he is simply a guardian of the Constitution, so he should not sign laws that he believes are contrary to the Constitution. Meanwhile, he signed (budgetary legislation) and then referred it to the Court. So the question must be raised: is there any uncertainty that there is no doubt? due to the fact that if it does – it should prevent, before signing, mention (the law) to the Court.
– Because (Kaminski with Wąsik – dop. ed.) they were legally convicted and carried out prison sentences, even if we presume that as a consequence of the resolution of the home of Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs of the ultimate Court they had a mandate, that is to say, that, according to the Act on the exercise of the mandate of a associate and Senator, they could not then exercise that mandate. This closes the case as regards the allegation that the budget bill has been passed incorrectly. The same applies to the 2 remaining laws passed on 16 January this year, which the president signed present and subsequently referred to the Constitutional Tribunal. – explained the constitutionalist in an interview with the diary of Legal paper Prof. Ryszard Piotrowski.
The president directed the budget bill to the TK after signing in follow-up control.
What does that mean? And what's the difference between follow-up control and preventive control?
Well, the budget bill IS.
It's very crucial to have RT!
Under the Constitution, preventive control would mean... pic.twitter.com/5Je24YAL5T
— Michał Sopiński (@michalsopinski) January 31, 2024
– From the point of view of the Constitutional Court's action and the number of laws that are passed in Parliament, it can be said that this will be the paralysis of this institution (...). This means that the bill will enter into force and only later will the Constitutional Court measure whether it is compatible or not it is consistent with the Constitution – commented on the president's announcement in an interview with Forsal.pl Vice president of the Faculty of Law and Administration of the University of Gdańsk Prof. Piotr Uzębły.
– Even if judges presume that 2 Members are inactive Members of Parliament who are sentenced by a final judgment, their refusal to participate in the proceedings does not necessarily mean that this had an effect on the passing or insolentness of the bill. – explained in an interview with the “Rzeczpospolita” constitutionalist Prof. Andrzej Jackievicz from the University of Białystok.
– The crucial thing is that the budget bill was signed, as was the budget bill. This means that the government can operate without emergency mode, and e.g. increases for teachers enter into force – explained in an interview with Money.pl expert in public finance, chief economist of the Institute of Public Finance Sławomir Dudek.
