MAIN POINTs
1
Continuing the dispute over the 2017 reform of Poland’s National Council of the Judiciary (NCJ), on June 29, the Presidium of the renewed National Council of the Judiciary adopted a position declaring that it does not recognize the positions taken by the two previous compositions of the NCJ, and announcing a review of the proceedings they conducted.
2
This position rests on the claim that the two previous compositions of the NCJ were flawed. Yet those compositions were selected under exactly the same provisions and by exactly the same procedure as the current one.
3
If the NCJ seeks in this way to undermine the motions of the previous compositions on the basis of which the President of the Republic of Poland appointed judges, this will amount to an attempt to circumvent Article 180 of the Polish Constitution, which permits the removal of a judge from office solely by a court ruling.
4
NCJ members who engage in challenging the status of judges appointed by the President on the basis of the Council’s earlier resolutions expose themselves to disciplinary liability, including removal from judicial office
On July 1, 2026, a communiqué on the position adopted by the Council’s Presidium the previous day was published on the website of Poland’s National Council of the Judiciary (NCJ). The communiqué is exceptionally brief, and its essence is expressed in the very first sentence:
At its meeting on June 29, 2026, the Presidium of the National Council of the Judiciary adopted a position in which it does not recognize the positions and assessments of legal acts adopted by the NCJ during the period from March 6, 2018 to May 15, 2026.
Despite this brevity, the communiqué contains two highly consequential and wholly unfounded assertions.
The NCJ challenges the legitimacy of its previous compositions, even though they were selected in exactly the same way as the current composition.
(…)
Source of cover photo: Ordo Iuris
