Supreme Court chief Zbigniew Kapiński condemns police presence at Constitutional Tribunal

Police at the Tribunal and a break ordered for its leadership

On Friday, 30 October 2026, police officers were sent to the building of the Constitutional Tribunal. Deputy President Bartłomiej Sochański was prevented from entering the premises. An order, a zarządzenie, issued by Anna Korwin-Piotrowska provides for a break in the official duties of the Tribunal's current leadership, Bogdan Święczkowski and Bartłomiej Sochański. The order is reported to set that break at one month, and it is the document the First President of the Supreme Court later objected to.

Supreme Court objection

Zbigniew Kapiński, First President of the Supreme Court, responded in a statement published on the Supreme Court's website. He said he received information about these steps with the highest outrage and firm opposition. He said the events raise serious objections about their compatibility with the fundamental principles of Poland's constitutional order, and he warned of a particularly dangerous precedent for the democratic rule of law. Kapiński put his core objection in one sentence:

“I firmly condemn any attempts to subordinate the activity of constitutional state bodies to coercive measures or decisions taken outside the statutory legal order.”

He argued that disputes over how constitutional bodies function must be settled under the rules set out in the Constitution and statutes, not through the threat of force. He also said that the question of how a constitutional body functions could not be decided by the use or threat of force.

Constitutional grounds cited

The statement cites articles 7, 10 and 173 of the Constitution. Article 7 requires public authorities to act on the basis of and within the limits of the law, article 10 sets out the separation and balance of powers, and article 173 guarantees that courts and tribunals are separate from and independent of other branches of power. Kapiński argued that these provisions rule out any public body restricting a constitutional organ's activity, or removing people who hold office in it from their duties, without statutory procedures. He added that no state body may grant itself powers the law does not provide, or use coercion to impose its own reading of the rules on other bodies.

On the role of the police, he wrote:

“In a democratic state under the rule of law, the police cannot be a tool for enforcing the political will of those currently in power.”

He said that the police cannot be used as an instrument of pressure on courts and tribunals, and that a contrary position would mean independence is decided by the possibility of applying force rather than by law.

What the statement warns about

Kapiński warned that silence in the face of actions undermining the independence of constitutional bodies would amount to tolerating practices that threaten the foundations of the constitutional order. In his view, the Constitutional Tribunal is currently the object of such actions. He framed the case as a question of whether the law or the ability to compel decides how far a constitutional body can act. The statement ends on that point, with the view that only the law can give the answer.