In 2017, the majority of the parliament passed a fresh bill on the National Judicial Council, signed by the president of Poland Andrzej Duda. From the very beginning, the opposition, with the support of the media and the legal community, regarded the fresh KRS as unconstitutional, although the full procedure was carried out in accordance with the rules and the Constitutional Court never found a violation of the Constitution. The consequence of undermining the legality of the KRS was questioning the position of judges and their judgments.
As part of these completely unlawful actions, there have been many scandals and worse violations of the rights of procedural parties. It was only on the grounds that the justice was appointed by the fresh KRS that the judgments were abrogated and in cases without the slightest political colour. The Poznań Court of Appeals lifted the conviction of a life prison for Serhii T., who killed his wife and 2 daughters in 2023. In the same court, the 14-year-old rape case was abrogated and the pedophile trial had to start again. In January 2026, the Giżyck territory Court issued a ruling on the inability to distribute the assets of erstwhile spouses, due to the fact that the judgement in their divorce case ‘does not exist’. In all these cases and many others, the only basis for questioning judgments was the fact that judges appointed or promoted after 2017.
Judges from the old system, dating back to the times of the Polish People's Republic, for nearly 10 years They were self-involved and vandalized., justifying their actions by the judgments of the TEU, which allegedly considered the "neasures" and the full ultimate Court Chamber to be non-existent. Today, this madness has been interrupted by the same judgement of the EU Court of Justice, which had to be peculiarly affected by "outstanding legal authority". The most crucial part of the conviction is clearly:
The mistake that was committed in the appointment of a justice is not adequate in itself to conclude that the justice is not independent.
The circumstances in which he fell give additional power to the judgment, and this is an answer to the questions referred for a preliminary ruling by the Poznań-Old City territory Court. The position of a justice pursuing civilian proceedings for payment was challenged by the plaintiff. The justice disagreed with this proposal and stated that she felt that “there are no circumstances in which it may rise doubts about its impartiality”. In a question addressed to the TEU, she stressed that the request for exemption contained no substantive grounds, and was based solely on the fact that it was set up by the fresh KRS. Today, the TEU full divided the position of the Poznań justice and thus cast arguments against politicised judges and “authoritists” who, in violation of the foundations of the law, regularly led to procedural obstruction.
There's 1 more thing that matters! The TEU must not straight interfere with Polish law or any another justice system, which has been stressed by reasonable lawyers for years. The questions referred for a preliminary ruling should concern only legal matters, not systemic and structural issues. This must be remembered due to the fact that the EU Court is an highly politicised tribunal and the past repeatedly issued political sentences the Treaty provisions. However, this judgement is of different value, namely, it ridicules all politicians, lawyers and journalists who, as part of the "street and abroad" action, have defended their positions in an ossified arrangement and, by covering themselves with democratic values, have attempted to hold a monopoly in the judiciary.
We don't believe in anyone, we don't believe in anything! We look at facts and draw conclusions!
