Święczkowski filed a study on the Polish government. The paper went to Trump's people

TK as the subject of attacks

Onet reports that the survey went to the president of the U.S. ultimate Court John G. Roberts, U.S. lawyer General Pam Bondi and another crucial representatives of the U.S. authorities. The study was sent on 9 June, a week after the announcement of the results of the presidential elections in Poland, won by Karol Nawrocki.

The paper prepared the Constitutional Court's “experts' team”. It states that the TK is the subject of unprecedented attacks by the Polish government and the parliamentary majority. Bogdan Święczkowski points out the deficiency of publication of the Court's judgments, the interruption of the remuneration of judges and the failure to hold vacant posts in the institutions.

The study stresses that undermining the independency of the judiciary and attacks on civilian rights authorities should not stay unresponsive.

Why the US?

Onet points out that the paper was prepared for American recipients. Bogdan Świętczkowski was to point out that the Constitutional Court is 1 of the last pillars of Polish sovereignty, which makes it subject to attacks from both national authorities and global institutions.

The aim of the study was to draw the global community's attention to the situation of the Constitutional Tribunal and to strengthen its function in the discussion of the regulation of law in Poland. The paper stresses that the Court, as an essential part of the independency of the State, has become a political objective.

A vendetta for a wife

Let us remind you that the fresh Minister of Justice Waldemar Żurek began office with the decision to suspend justice Małgorzata Hengel-Świętzkowska in his capacity as president of the territory Court of Sosnowiec. This happened just before the end of her word of office, which sparked a discussion on the recitals of this decision.

Bogdan Świętczkowski himself, privately married to a suspended judge, responded rapidly to the minister's move. He felt that the decision was individual and was aimed at his family, treating it as a form of political retaliation for the activities of the Court.