Marcin Kierwiński on 11 September in Polsat News rejected Zbigniew Bogucki's reservations against the election of Maciej Berk to the Constitutional Court and sent the head of the National Council for Public Administration to make assessments “at dinner”. The dispute concerns the required 10-year stint of legal counsel, and its final decision will be made whether Berek will take up the office of justice TK.
Minister responds with attack
Marcin Kierwiński appeared on 11 September in the Polsat News Guest Program. erstwhile asked about the reservations of the Presidential Palace against the election of Maciej Berk, he did not make a detailed discussion with the contents of the letter addressed to the Sejm. Instead, he attacked the right hand and declared that the times erstwhile PiS politicians were to decide the legality of actions had passed.
The head of the Ministry of abroad Affairs assured that the Sejm had deliberately voted on the candidacy and kept the formalities. He then stated that Zbigniew Bogucki could make his assessments at home, “at dinner and to his spouse”, while as a state authoritative he was to respect the law. The words are harsh, but do not answer the basic question: what papers confirm the required candidate's internship?
Ten years of traineeship in question
Parliament He chose Maciej Berk as justice of the TK September 4th. The candidate was supported by 226 Members, with the required 219 votes. The authoritative vote took place at the 64th Chamber meeting. Berek was previously the minister liable for overseeing the implementation of Donald Tusk's government policy, and his candidacy was submitted by Members of the Civic Coalition.
Zbigniew Bogucki questioned the way in which he checked that Berek fulfilled statutory conditions. The provisions require, among another things, a candidate to prosecute at least 10 years as a legal advisor or an appropriate traineeship in the designated legal positions. The President's office indicatedthat the entry on the list of advisers does not prejudge the actual pursuit of the profession for the required period.
In a letter to the talker of the Sejm, Bogucki asked for papers on the basis of which the Chamber verified Berk's qualifications. The candidate presented a certificate from the territory Chamber of Legal Advisors in Warsaw. It follows that he has the power from September 25, 2002 and has applied for the profession from January 1, 2006 to July 31, 2009 and August 1, 2012 to the present day. The dispute concerns whether the registration is adequate as evidence of actual professional practice.
State of law requires documents
The government can defend its candidate. He is besides entitled to argue with the Presidential Palace. However, he cannot pretend that the request to present papers is simply a private authoritative fanaber. It is the office of justice of the Constitutional Court, not the organization nomination, which is adequate to vote and announce the conclusion of the case.
The credibility of the Polish state is at stake. If papers confirm Berk's ten-year stature, they must be submitted and the dispute closed. If they are not present, the majority of the Sejm must explain on what grounds it allowed the candidate to vote. No vow term shows that the procedure does not end with Members' decisions.
Kiewiński tries to bring legality control to the political mouth. It's convenient due to the fact that a strong ripost replaces the answer to a circumstantial one. Poles, however, have the right to anticipate that laws and documents, not coalition discipline, are crucial erstwhile casting the Court. State sovereignty begins with serious treatment of its own law.
Source: To Things, Office of the president of Poland, Polish Parliament.
Source: To Things
