Polish opposition criticizes judicial nominee's political past

The nomination of Maciej Berek to Poland's Constitutional Tribunal has reignited controversy, with critics arguing the move contradicts the government's stated aim of depoliticizing the judiciary. The core of the criticism, as articulated by commentators, is that appointing an active politician to a judicial body designed to be independent fundamentally undermines its legitimacy.

Critics draw a parallel to past appointments, such as Krystyna Pawłowicz and Stanisław Piotrowicz, who were also active politicians. However, the current government had pledged to uphold higher standards. The argument that the tribunal needs a "strong hand" to restore order is also questioned, with comparisons drawn to figures like Bogdan Święczkowski, who was perceived as having a similar mission in a different context.

The author contends that the Constitutional Tribunal has effectively ceased to function. Personnel changes alone, or even attempts at a forceful takeover or the establishment of a rival tribunal, will not resolve the issue. True restoration, the argument goes, hinges on depolarization and political compromise.

Without such compromise, future rulings of the tribunal risk being ignored or unpublished, mirroring past practices. This phenomenon is attributed to a form of "magical thinking" about law, where prohibitions and stricter penalties are seen as sufficient. However, the article stresses that effective law requires not only rules and sanctions but also enforcement and a degree of social acceptance, elements currently lacking.