The president did not say which constitutional norms were violated. A lawyer will always look for a legal basis and feel some moral obligation to indicate the legal basis, even if he is only giving a speech – said Jerzy Stępień in “Fakty po Faktach” on TVN24. In the program, the former president of the Constitutional Tribunal commented on the speech of President Andrzej Duda, who accused the new government of violating the constitution.
Piotr Kraśka’s guest in Tuesday’s edition of “Fakty po Faktach” on TVN24 was the president of the Constitutional Tribunal, Jerzy Stępień, who was asked about the New Year’s Eve Andrzej Duda’s message. The president stated, among other things, that “there will be no consent to violating the constitution.” – And this is the situation we are currently dealing with, unfortunately – he said.
“The president did not say which constitutional norms were violated”
Given these words, Stępień was asked what the penalties were for violating the constitution. – The State Tribunal is threatened. I think there were two cases (of bringing a person before the Court of Justice – ed.). But I must admit that there has never been a case where a really prominent person from the front line of politics appeared before the State Tribunal, he said.
When asked whether anything follows from the fact that the president declared in his speech that the new government was violating the constitution, he said that “not much follows.” – Especially since the president did not say which constitutional norms were violated – replied Stępień. – I understand that he did not have to say it during the speech itself, but at least (there should be – editor) some statement the next day, or at least his services should say where the constitution was violated – he added.
– Because if, for example, we say that the president is violating the constitution, we refer to the ruling of the Constitutional Tribunal, which clearly indicated what constitutional norms were violated. If we are talking about a pardon that could not have any effect, we refer to the content of the relevant article in the constitution, which mentions the right of pardon, he noted.
As he noted, “a lawyer will always look for a legal basis and feel some moral obligation to indicate this legal basis, even if he is only giving a speech.”
The former president of the Constitutional Tribunal, asked whether the president’s statement about violating the constitution should not be followed by anything, replied that in his opinion the president “should issue a statement the next day and say in which points the constitution was violated by the prime minister.”
When asked what would happen if the president did not indicate these points and whether there should be certain consequences, Stępień replied: – We will throw up our hands again and say that we have, unfortunately, an imperfect legal system which, in fact, was constructed in such a way that the most important people they did not bear any responsibility in the state.
Main photo source: Radek Pietruszka/PAP