10.2 C
Thursday, February 22, 2024

Lext Tusk. President Andrzej Duda proposes amendments. Professor Ryszard Piotrowski and attorney Sylwia Gregorczyk-Abram comment

Must read

- Advertisement -

The amendments to “lex Tusk” proposed by President Andrzej Duda “do not eliminate the tools of blackmail and political corruption that we give to the majority” – assessed the constitutionalist Professor Ryszard Piotrowski in the “Yes Yes” program. In his opinion, “this rescue initiative does not change the fundamental flaws of this project.” – The proposed changes are also unconstitutional. They do not really repair the functioning of this commission – said attorney Sylwia Gregorczyk-Abram from the “Free Courts” Initiative.

President Andrzej Duda announced on Friday that it was ready an amendment to the law on the commission for examining Russian influence, the so-called “lex Tusk”. A few days earlier, on Monday, the president signed the act and at the same time announced that he would refer it to the Constitutional Tribunal in a subsequent procedure. The law was widely opposed by experts and politicians both in Poland and abroad. In their opinion, it violates the principles of a democratic state ruled by law, many provisions of the constitution and is aimed at eliminating political opponents. They also expressed concern about the regulations United States and the European Union.

On Friday afternoon, the bill was submitted to the Sejm.

READ MORE: “Lex Tusk”. The draft amendment to the president was submitted to the Sejm. What’s in it

- Advertisement -

READ ON CONKRET24: Which articles of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland are violated by the “lex Tusk” act

President: I have prepared a draft amendment to the law on the commission for examining Russian influence

Gregorczyk-Abram: The changes proposed by the president are unconstitutional

Attorney Sylwia Gregorczyk-Abram from the “Free Courts” Initiative recognized in the “Tak jest” program that the president “he was scared of some reactions, probably our allies, and now he is trying to powder what happened ineptly.” – The proposed changes are also unconstitutional. They do not really fix the functioning of this commission – she assessed.

President Duda proposed that the “remedial measures” in the act should be replaced by the statement that “a person who has been found to have acted under Russian influence does not guarantee the proper performance of activities in the public interest.” The lawyer explained that the term “does not guarantee” in this case means that the person “deserves a negative moral and political assessment by the commission”. “It doesn’t require a more detailed justification,” she noted. – This may de facto deprive you of the right to vote, because in order to be an MP or senator, you must have an impeccable character. We have this lockpick to be able to effectively remove certain people from public life – said the patron.

In her opinion, the proposal to replace parliamentarians with external experts is also not a good solution. – Politicians at least have some rules of parliamentary ethics, and experts do not have these rules at all – she pointed out. She added that parliamentarians are also accountable to voters, and “experts have no responsibility”.

Gregorczyk-Abram also pointed out that President Duda proposes in his amendment that an administrative decision be appealed to a common court of appeal. “Such a structure was not known to us before,” said the lawyer. She added that “the party is still getting rid of the two-instance nature of this procedure, because there is a commission, but there is no appeal to administrative bodies, there is a common court, which is also unknown from what constitutional key it came here.”

Professor Piotrowski: all the president’s proposals have one meaning

– The constitutional instability of the president consists in a rapid transition from an approving assessment to a negative assessment in relation to the same solutions – said constitutionalist prof. Richard Piotrowski. In his opinion, all the president’s proposals “have one meaning”. – They are a rescue initiative to convince the public, perhaps also the expert public, that everything is fine with the act, but it is not, he said.

He emphasized that “we are still dealing with an administrative body that will be empowered to determine whether someone gives this guarantee (proper performance of activities in the public interest – ed.) or not, whether it can be considered trustworthy or not “. – It is true that there is an appeal to the court, but this judicial route is less important here than just stating in front of the cameras, in front of voters, how it is with this man – said the professor.

The constitutionalist pointed out that in the light of the act, “behaviours that have been correct so far, suddenly – as a result of the change in the international situation – become unacceptable.” – We are creating a body that will act on political demand, designed to stigmatize specific people – he warned. According to him, the proposals for changes suggested by the president do not change the fact that “we still have a witch hunt.” – What’s more, we have a law in force and it will be implemented – he added, explaining that the law is in force even though it has been sent to the Constitutional Tribunal, because it bears the president’s signature.

Prof.  Piotrowski: all the president's proposals have one meaning

Prof. Piotrowski: all the president’s proposals have one meaningTVN24

“Lex Tusk” is a “dangerous precedent”

According to prof. Piotrowski, “the sense of this law, taking into account the president’s amendments, is for citizens to draw conclusions from it.” – It is they who, in this ideal model, are supposed to decide that someone does not deserve the voters’ trust – he assessed. He added that “we still have a problem: public administration bodywhich is supposed to give us an election result.” – Such a solution has nothing to do with the constitution – he argued.

He warned that “lex Tusk” set a “dangerous precedent”. – The new majority, if it could be formed, could say: “Well, since we can introduce the lustration introduced here by law, then we will rule on the lack of the ability to receive guarantees against all those who acted against the democratic system in Poland.” he noted. He added, however, that “Mr. President does not seem like a person who could be summoned before this committee.”

– This project does not eliminate the tool of blackmail and political corruption that we give to the majority. It’s not about money, but specific interests. Therefore, this rescue initiative does not change the fundamental flaws of this project and it will not make the commission something positive and acceptable – summed up prof. Piotrowski.

Main photo source: TVN24

Source link

More articles

- Advertisement -

Latest article