Venice Commission opinion reportedly favours systemic fix for Constitutional Tribunal row

Opinion adopted, text kept confidential

On Friday, 9 October 2026, the Venice Commission, the Council of Europe advisory body on constitutional law, adopted an opinion at a plenary session on the rules governing the president's powers to administer oaths to Constitutional Tribunal (TK) judges and to make other appointments. PAP learned from commission sources that the opinion favours a systemic solution to the present situation around the tribunal. The text stays confidential until publication, which PAP's sources expected on Monday or Tuesday. The opinion was based on reports from experts in Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, Ireland and Finland, and was requested by the PACE Monitoring Committee. Presidential adviser and constitutionalist Dariusz Dudek took part in the sessions, as did Daniel Kędzierski on behalf of the Sejm.

The presidency's position

After the plenary discussion with the Polish delegation, Dudek spoke to PAP and welcomed the commission's work while disputing parts of the text.

We greatly appreciate the effort of the Venice Commission to help Poland solve the problems concerning the Constitutional Tribunal, but not all of the findings in the adopted opinion are consistent with our current constitutional law and the facts.

Dudek stated that President Karol Nawrocki has never refused to swear in newly elected judges, and that neither the president nor his Chancellery has ever said otherwise.

First of all, it must be said that President Karol Nawrocki has never refused to accept the oath of newly elected judges. No such statement has ever been made by the president or anyone from his Chancellery. There is no such situation.

He traced the dispute to 2015, when some Sejm elections of judges filled seats already occupied. A later Sejm annulled the election of five judges made in autumn 2015 and chose five others, three of whom became known as sędziowie dublerzy (duplicate judges). Dudek argued that this defect in the panels undermined the effectiveness of the tribunal's rulings, and said the current ruling side has not filled vacancies since December 2024, which he called a deadlock.

Four judges without oath recognition

Anna Korwin-Piotrowska, Marcin Dziurda, Krystian Markiewicz and Maciej Taborowski were elected by the Sejm on 13 March 2026 to nine-year terms on the tribunal. President Nawrocki did not allow them to take the oath at the Presidential Palace, so on 9 April they took it at the Sejm and gave him a notarised copy. TK president Bogdan Święczkowski does not accept that they took office, has not admitted them to adjudicate, and has assigned them neither cases nor offices. PAP's dispatch refers to five judges elected this year who did not receive the oath from the president, while the pay reporting names these four, and the articles do not reconcile the two figures.

What the pay gap would be

Under article 16 of the act on the status of TK judges, a judge's basic salary equals five times the average wage for the second quarter of the previous year. That average was 8,748.63 zł in Q2 2025, which gives a basic gross monthly salary of 43,743.15 zł in 2026. Over six full months the coverage puts the total at about 1.05 million zł for the four judges, or about 262,500 zł each. Business Insider estimates the arrears at no less than 270,000 zł gross per judge without publishing a full calculation, and notes that higher figures may include allowances. In 2027 the basic salary would rise to 46,165.65 zł gross, based on the Q2 2026 average of 9,233.13 zł.

Split inside the Sejm

According to Business Insider, the judges asked the Ministry of Justice and the Sejm marshal for help. Waldemar Żurek looked for a solution and argued that, because the Sejm made the election, parliament should help find a legal route to payment. Anonymous sources told the outlet that Marshal Włodzimierz Czarzasty was initially in favour, but Marek Siwiec, head of the Sejm Chancellery, objected and said there is no legal basis for paying compensation from parliamentary funds. Neither Czarzasty nor Siwiec has publicly set out a detailed position, so this account rests on that outlet's reporting alone. The coverage also says the European Court of Human Rights intervened but did not order payment.