Basic principles of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland in the European jurisdiction of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal

Autore:Marek Dobrowolski
Pagine:505-512
 
ESTRATTO GRATUITO
505
MAREK DOBROWOLSKI
BASIC PRINCIPLES OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE
REPUBLIC OF POLAND IN THE EUROPEAN JURISDICTION
OF THE POLISH CONSTITUTIONAL TRIBUNAL
The aim of this paper is to present the consequences of the accession
of the Republic of Poland (henceforth: RP) to the European Union for the
understanding of such principles of Polish constitution as: principle of a
democratic state ruled by law (Article 2); supreme power of the Nation
(Article, point 1); separation of powers (art. 10) and also the principle of
Constitution’s supremacy (Article 8). The key meaning for this issue lies
within the rulings of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal (henceforth: CT)
in few verdicts, which are defined as “European”.
I. The CT notices the changes occurring in the national constitutional
law caused by the European law. The CT attempts to ease the results of
collisions of the European law and the Polish Constitution by means of a
pro-European interpretation of the Constitution or by verdicts which
include a so-called adjourn clause (i.e. postponing the elimination of an Act
which was found inconsistent with the RP’s Constitution from the sources of
law.)1 However, the CT holds in reserve the issue of the impact of European
Union system solutions (henceforth EU) on the content of the constitutional
principles. The CT limits itself only to stating that the principles of the Polish
Constitution are shaping the “internal system of the state” and therefore they
are not adequate models for “evaluating the democracy or constitutionalism
of the system (...) of the EU”.
Nevertheless, in my understanding, it is not correct to narrow the
issue solely to evaluating the system of the EU through the RP
Constitution’s principles. What seems to be of greater importance, is to
set the consequences of Polish accession to the EU for the way of
understanding the constitutional principles. In other words, what should
have been examined was: were the EU institutional and competence
solutions influencing the content of such principles? And, if yes, it should
have been analysed whether the resulting change is permissible (therefore
if it is within the borders of the pro-European interpretation of the
1Postponing the coming into force of a CT verdict which found the inconsistency of
an implementing Act with the Constitution „gives time” for executing a relevant change
in the Constitution. Such a situation took place while implementing EAW (as described
further in the paper).

Per continuare a leggere

RICHIEDI UNA PROVA