Fact-Checked News AI

Politics

Suspension of Poland's constitutional court president triggers a standoff with the head of state

A government-backed judge suspended the president of Poland's Constitutional Tribunal on 30 October, prompting a police deployment, street protests and an overnight entry into the court by President Karol Nawrocki.

Published
31 October 2026, 08:00
Written by
Claude Opus (an AI model by Anthropic), from public sources
Sources
28 references: 3 primary or official, 23 news reports, 2 other
Links checked
31 October 2026: 28 of 28 opened, 21 with an archived copy
Citations audited
31 October 2026: 154 cited sentences checked against their sources. 143 supported, 11 corrected
Keywords
Constitutional Tribunal of Poland; rule of law; judicial independence; judicial immunity; separation of powers; Court of Justice of the European Union; European Court of Human Rights; constitutional crisis

Abstract

Poland's Constitutional Tribunal, a 15-member court whose composition has been in dispute since the Law and Justice party (PiS) took power in 2015, became the centre of a new confrontation on 30 October 2026[1]. Judge Anna Korwin-Piotrowska, elected by the current parliamentary majority, suspended the tribunal's president, Bogdan Święczkowski, and its vice-president, Bartłomiej Sochański, for one month and took charge of the court[1,2,3]. Police entered the premises, and seven newly elected judges were escorted into the building[1,4,5]. President Karol Nawrocki turned back from a trip to Senegal and entered the tribunal in the early hours of 31 October with the First President of the Supreme Court[5,6]. Justice minister Waldemar Żurek submitted five motions, running to 224 pages, to lift the immunity of the two men[7,8]. The order relies on article 130 of the law on common courts, a basis the constitutional law scholar Marcin Matczak calls nonexistent[1,2]. The Court of Justice of the European Union found on 18 December 2025 that the tribunal does not meet EU standards of independence[9]. Nawrocki describes the night as a forcible takeover of a constitutional organ[10]. The court now has two rival leaderships, the legal basis chosen for the suspension is disputed, and much of the detail of the president's night inside the building was reported by the tabloid Super Express[2,11,12].

Key points

References

  1. Notes from Poland. Chaos at Poland’s constitutional court as government-backed judges seek to oust chief justice. Notes from Poland; 30 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the one-month suspension, Korwin-Piotrowska's takeover, the X account statements, the SOP escort of seven judges, the fence cut with a power tool, the quotes from Tusk, Kapiński, Kaczyński and Matczak, and the background on PiS appointments and the coalition's non-recognition of the court. ↩
  2. Prawo.pl. Spór o Trybunał Konstytucyjny, Anna Korwin-Piotrowska zawiesza w czynnościach Święczkowskiego. Prawo.pl; 30 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the legal basis of the order (article 130 with article 19), its three stated grounds, the one-month period and Matczak's article 195 objection. ↩
  3. Notes from Poland. Polish ruling coalition picks six judges for constitutional court but faces potential standoff with president. Notes from Poland; 13 Mar 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the names of the six judges, their nine-year terms, the voting pattern, the legal gap on refused oaths and Bogucki's quote. ↩
  4. NBC News. Polish president turns back from Senegal trip as top court chief suspended. NBC News; 30 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedSupports the police statement on dangerous objects, Tusk's longer quote, Żurek's reason for the immunity requests and the PiS coup accusation. ↩
  5. RTÉ News. Polish riot police deployed after court chief suspended. RTÉ; 30 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the police account, Nawrocki's Senegal trip and quote, Żurek's immunity request, the PiS coup claims and the 'three of six' judge count. ↩
  6. Euronews. Polish president turns back mid-flight amid court 'coup d'état' claims. Euronews; 30 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the tribunal's 'coup d'état' post, the 'Tusk traitor' chants, Nawrocki's quote on returning, and his early-Saturday entry with Kapiński. ↩
  7. The Kyiv Independent. Polish president cuts short foreign trip as constitutional crisis escalates in Warsaw. The Kyiv Independent; 31 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the five immunity motions (four and one) with 50 volumes of files, the three detentions, police blocking Święczkowski and Kumoch's resignation quote. ↩
  8. Biskupski R. Bogdan Święczkowski może stracić immunitet. Waldemar Żurek złożył cztery wnioski. Rzeczpospolita; 30 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the five motions of 224 pages with 50 volumes, the link to the Pegasus investigation and the rule that the tribunal's general assembly decides on immunity. ↩
  9. Polskie Radio. EU court rules Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal lacks independence. Polskie Radio (Polish public radio); 18 Dec 2025. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the CJEU finding of 18 December 2025 on independence, the named irregular appointments of 2015 and 2016, and the rejection of interim measures. ↩
  10. Rzeczpospolita. Karol Nawrocki wydał oświadczenie w sprawie sytuacji w Trybunale Konstytucyjnym. Rzeczpospolita; 31 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedSupports the content of Nawrocki's statement of 31 October, including the call for coercive forces to withdraw, Sochański's admission, Kapiński's non-recognition and the urgent consultations. ↩
  11. Super Express. Prezydent Karol Nawrocki wkroczył w nocy do Trybunału Konstytucyjnego. Padły oskarżenia o zamach stanu. Super Express; 31 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedSupports the account of the corridor confrontation, the exchange with Korwin-Piotrowska, Bogucki's coup accusation and Żurek's response. ↩
  12. Mikulski J. Prof. Marcin Matczak reaguje na wydarzenia w Trybunale Konstytucyjnym. „Nie ma podstaw”. Rzeczpospolita; Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports Matczak's arguments on the minister's lack of supervisory power, the breach of about five constitutional provisions, the extension of executive power and his view that the rule of law cannot be restored by force. ↩
  13. Notes from Poland. New Polish constitutional court judge takes oath in defiance of president. Notes from Poland; 14 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the count of eight judges elected and three sworn in, Berek's oath on 14 October, Nawrocki's objections, Bogucki's quotes and the Venice Commission's 13 October findings. ↩
  14. Prokuratura Krajowa. Komunikat o nierozpoznaniu przez Zgromadzenie Ogólne Sędziów Trybunału Konstytucyjnego wniosku o uchylenie immunitetu Bogdanowi Święczkowskiemu. Prokuratura Krajowa (National Prosecutor's Office), gov.pl; 3 Dec 2025. Official statement✓ Link checkedSupports the 30 September 2025 request linked to Pegasus, the 15 October 2025 vote, the claim that only three judges read the classified evidence, and the prosecution's argument that the decision is invalid. ↩

A suspension order and a contested takeover

On Friday 30 October 2026, Anna Korwin-Piotrowska, a judge elected to Poland's Constitutional Tribunal by the current parliamentary majority, issued orders suspending the tribunal's president, Bogdan Święczkowski, and its vice-president, Bartłomiej Sochański, from their duties for one month[1,2,3]. Citing seniority as a judge, Korwin-Piotrowska also took charge of the court[1]. The tribunal is a 15-member court whose composition has been in dispute since the Law and Justice party (PiS) took power in 2015[1]. The order gives as its legal basis article 130 of the law on the organisation of common courts, read together with article 19 of the act on the status of Constitutional Tribunal judges[2].

The tribunal's account on X responded that there had been an unlawful takeover of the court's website, that Święczkowski remained chief justice and that Korwin-Piotrowska was not a judge of the tribunal[1]. Police said officers entered the premises after incidents outside the court, including the throwing of dangerous objects at police[4,5]. On Friday evening seven newly elected judges were escorted into the building by the State Protection Service through a gate connecting the court to the prime minister's chancellery[1].

Waldemar Żurek, who is both justice minister and prosecutor general, submitted five motions on the same day asking the tribunal to lift judicial immunity, four of them concerning Święczkowski and one concerning Sochański[6,7]. Prime Minister Donald Tusk defended the operation, writing that "Restoring the rule of law is our duty" and "There is no other way"[1]. PiS politicians, including the party leader Jarosław Kaczyński, accused the government of carrying out a coup on the tribunal[4,5].

The president enters the court

President Karol Nawrocki, an ally of PiS, was flying to Senegal when the suspension became known[5]. He turned his aircraft back in mid-flight, writing that "At a moment like this, the President must be in Poland"[5,8]. In the early hours of Saturday 31 October, Nawrocki entered the tribunal building with Zbigniew Kapiński, the First President of the Supreme Court[8].

In a statement reported by the daily Rzeczpospolita, Nawrocki said that the night had brought a breach of Poland's constitutional order and a forcible takeover of a constitutional organ of the state[9]. He called for the coercive forces sent to the tribunal by the government to leave, and said he had let Sochański, whom he described as the lawfully serving vice-president, into the building[9]. Citing threats to Poland's internal security, he called urgent consultations with representatives of the parliamentary parties for the same day[9]. Kaczyński wrote that Poland was becoming "a police state"[1,10].

A dispute rooted in the appointments of 2015

The roots of the present conflict lie in a series of appointments made in 2015[11]. Before leaving office that year, the outgoing government led by the Civic Platform party had parliament appoint five judges to the tribunal, although it was entitled to fill only three seats[11]. President Andrzej Duda then refused to swear in three lawfully elected judges, and the new PiS-controlled parliament elected three replacements, including Mariusz Muszyński, to seats that were already filled[11].

On 7 May 2021 the European Court of Human Rights ruled in Xero Flor v Poland that the tribunal had not acted as a "tribunal established by law", because Muszyński had been appointed to a seat that was already occupied[11]. On 18 December 2025 the Court of Justice of the European Union found that the tribunal does not meet EU standards of independence and impartiality[12]. Tusk called the ruling a "green light" and said: "From now on we can try to fix the Constitutional Tribunal by systematically appointing new judges as their terms expire"[13].

By December 2025 only nine of the 15 seats were occupied[14]. On 13 March 2026 the Sejm, the lower house of parliament, elected six judges to nine-year terms[3,15]. On 1 April Nawrocki swore in two of them, Dariusz Szostek and Magdalena Bentkowska, but refused the other four, who took their oaths at a ceremony in parliament on 9 April[14,16]. Święczkowski refused to let the four begin work, and in May the European Court of Human Rights provisionally granted an interim measure in their favour[15,17]. By October parliament had elected eight new judges during 2026, and Nawrocki had sworn in only three of them[18].

The criminal case behind the immunity requests

A tribunal judge can be prosecuted only if the tribunal's general assembly of judges lifts the judge's immunity[7]. Żurek first asked for consent to prosecute Święczkowski on 30 September 2025, in connection with an investigation into the use of Pegasus spyware[19]. Prosecutors allege that while serving as national prosecutor under the PiS government, Święczkowski abused power by directing another official to review surveillance material concerning Roman Giertych, a lawyer and close associate of Tusk[20].

On 15 October 2025 the general assembly refused its consent, and all ten judges who voted opposed lifting the immunity[19]. Święczkowski said that all actions had been lawful and called the request "a scandalous political stunt"[20]. The prosecution said that only three of the ten voting judges had read the classified evidence, and argued that the decision lacked legal validity because judges whose appointments are contested had taken part[19].

Rival legal readings of the suspension

According to Prawo.pl, Korwin-Piotrowska's order sets out three grounds: that Święczkowski failed to convene the general assembly to adopt the 2027 budget, that he prevented five newly elected judges from performing their duties in breach of the Strasbourg court's interim measure, and that he made publicly delivered statements of an overtly political character[2]. Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski argued that the outgoing president was preventing the duly elected majority from working, and that action had to be taken to enable the tribunal to function once again[10]. On 13 October the Venice Commission found that the president must swear in judges chosen by parliament without delay and has no power to review their election, although its opinions are advisory rather than binding[18,21].

Marcin Matczak, a constitutional law scholar, said that "this legal basis is nonexistent for a million reasons"[1]. He argued that article 130 lets only the justice minister suspend judges of the common courts, and that tribunal judges are subject only to the constitution under its article 195[2,22]. He also said that the rule of law cannot be restored by force[22].

Reliance on article 130 of the common courts law to suspend judges of the tribunal is itself contested[2]. The Strasbourg measure is provisional[15]. The allegations against Święczkowski, which Święczkowski denies, have not been tested in court[20]. It is also unknown how the one-month suspension will end, and whether any body accepted by both camps will rule on it.

References

  1. Notes from Poland. Chaos at Poland’s constitutional court as government-backed judges seek to oust chief justice. Notes from Poland; 30 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the one-month suspension, Korwin-Piotrowska's takeover, the X account statements, the SOP escort of seven judges, the fence cut with a power tool, the quotes from Tusk, Kapiński, Kaczyński and Matczak, and the background on PiS appointments and the coalition's non-recognition of the court. ↩
  2. Prawo.pl. Spór o Trybunał Konstytucyjny, Anna Korwin-Piotrowska zawiesza w czynnościach Święczkowskiego. Prawo.pl; 30 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the legal basis of the order (article 130 with article 19), its three stated grounds, the one-month period and Matczak's article 195 objection. ↩
  3. Notes from Poland. Polish ruling coalition picks six judges for constitutional court but faces potential standoff with president. Notes from Poland; 13 Mar 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the names of the six judges, their nine-year terms, the voting pattern, the legal gap on refused oaths and Bogucki's quote. ↩
  4. NBC News. Polish president turns back from Senegal trip as top court chief suspended. NBC News; 30 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedSupports the police statement on dangerous objects, Tusk's longer quote, Żurek's reason for the immunity requests and the PiS coup accusation. ↩
  5. RTÉ News. Polish riot police deployed after court chief suspended. RTÉ; 30 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the police account, Nawrocki's Senegal trip and quote, Żurek's immunity request, the PiS coup claims and the 'three of six' judge count. ↩
  6. The Kyiv Independent. Polish president cuts short foreign trip as constitutional crisis escalates in Warsaw. The Kyiv Independent; 31 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the five immunity motions (four and one) with 50 volumes of files, the three detentions, police blocking Święczkowski and Kumoch's resignation quote. ↩
  7. Biskupski R. Bogdan Święczkowski może stracić immunitet. Waldemar Żurek złożył cztery wnioski. Rzeczpospolita; 30 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the five motions of 224 pages with 50 volumes, the link to the Pegasus investigation and the rule that the tribunal's general assembly decides on immunity. ↩
  8. Euronews. Polish president turns back mid-flight amid court 'coup d'état' claims. Euronews; 30 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the tribunal's 'coup d'état' post, the 'Tusk traitor' chants, Nawrocki's quote on returning, and his early-Saturday entry with Kapiński. ↩
  9. Rzeczpospolita. Karol Nawrocki wydał oświadczenie w sprawie sytuacji w Trybunale Konstytucyjnym. Rzeczpospolita; 31 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedSupports the content of Nawrocki's statement of 31 October, including the call for coercive forces to withdraw, Sochański's admission, Kapiński's non-recognition and the urgent consultations. ↩
  10. ANI. Action had to be taken to enable the tribunal to function once again: Poland's Foreign Minister Sikorski on constitutional crisis. The Tribune; 31 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedSupports Sikorski's quotes at the G20 meeting in Atlanta and Kaczyński's 'police state' remark. ↩
  11. Notes from Poland. Poland’s constitutional court not a “tribunal established by law”, rules ECHR. Notes from Poland; 7 May 2021. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the 2015 appointment history, the Xero Flor ruling of 7 May 2021 concerning Muszyński, and Przyłębska's response. ↩
  12. Polskie Radio. EU court rules Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal lacks independence. Polskie Radio (Polish public radio); 18 Dec 2025. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the CJEU finding of 18 December 2025 on independence, the named irregular appointments of 2015 and 2016, and the rejection of interim measures. ↩
  13. Polskie Radio. EU court ruling opens path to fix Poland’s top court, PM says. Polskie Radio (Polish public radio); 18 Dec 2025. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports Tusk's 'green light' remark, his quote on appointing new judges and his statement that it would take time. ↩
  14. Notes from Poland. Polish parliament hosts swearing in of constitutional court judges in defiance of president. Notes from Poland; 9 Apr 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the nine of 15 seats filled after December 2025 and the oath ceremonies of 1 and 9 April 2026. ↩
  15. European Court of Human Rights. Interim measure granted concerning Poland. European Court of Human Rights; 6 May 2026. Official statement✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the 13 March 2026 election date and the provisional interim measure in Dziurda and Others v Poland. ↩
  16. International IDEA. Poland April 2026 – Global State of Democracy Initiative, Democracy Tracker. International IDEA; Apr 2026. Other✓ Link checkedSupports the oath ceremonies of 1 and 9 April 2026. ↩
  17. Notes from Poland. European court orders Polish constitutional tribunal to accept judges rejected by president. Notes from Poland; 6 May 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the written oaths, Nawrocki's objections and motion, Święczkowski's refusal, the wording of the interim measure, and the reactions of the tribunal spokeswoman and Tusk. ↩
  18. Notes from Poland. New Polish constitutional court judge takes oath in defiance of president. Notes from Poland; 14 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the count of eight judges elected and three sworn in, Berek's oath on 14 October, Nawrocki's objections, Bogucki's quotes and the Venice Commission's 13 October findings. ↩
  19. Prokuratura Krajowa. Komunikat o nierozpoznaniu przez Zgromadzenie Ogólne Sędziów Trybunału Konstytucyjnego wniosku o uchylenie immunitetu Bogdanowi Święczkowskiemu. Prokuratura Krajowa (National Prosecutor's Office), gov.pl; 3 Dec 2025. Official statement✓ Link checkedSupports the 30 September 2025 request linked to Pegasus, the 15 October 2025 vote, the claim that only three judges read the classified evidence, and the prosecution's argument that the decision is invalid. ↩
  20. Notes from Poland. Polish constitutional court rejects justice minister’s request to lift chief justice’s immunity. Notes from Poland; 17 Oct 2025. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the Giertych surveillance allegation, Sochański chairing the vote, Święczkowski's abstention and his denial and 'scandalous political stunt' quote. ↩
  21. Brussels Signal. Tusk moves to take over constitutional court by force. Brussels Signal; Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports Nawrocki's objection on Berek's experience, the quoted Venice Commission sentence, the advisory status of its opinion and Sroczyński's warning. ↩
  22. Mikulski J. Prof. Marcin Matczak reaguje na wydarzenia w Trybunale Konstytucyjnym. „Nie ma podstaw”. Rzeczpospolita; Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports Matczak's arguments on the minister's lack of supervisory power, the breach of about five constitutional provisions, the extension of executive power and his view that the rule of law cannot be restored by force. ↩

Abstract

Poland's Constitutional Tribunal, a 15-member court whose composition has been in dispute since the Law and Justice party (PiS) took power in 2015, became the centre of a new confrontation on 30 October 2026[1]. Judge Anna Korwin-Piotrowska, elected by the current parliamentary majority, suspended the tribunal's president, Bogdan Święczkowski, and its vice-president, Bartłomiej Sochański, for one month and took charge of the court[1,2,3]. Police entered the premises, and seven newly elected judges were escorted into the building[1,4,5]. President Karol Nawrocki turned back from a trip to Senegal and entered the tribunal in the early hours of 31 October with the First President of the Supreme Court[5,6]. Justice minister Waldemar Żurek submitted five motions, running to 224 pages, to lift the immunity of the two men[7,8]. The order relies on article 130 of the law on common courts, a basis the constitutional law scholar Marcin Matczak calls nonexistent[1,2]. The Court of Justice of the European Union found on 18 December 2025 that the tribunal does not meet EU standards of independence[9]. Nawrocki describes the night as a forcible takeover of a constitutional organ[10]. The court now has two rival leaderships, the legal basis chosen for the suspension is disputed, and much of the detail of the president's night inside the building was reported by the tabloid Super Express[2,11,12].

1A suspension order and a police cordon in Warsaw

On Friday 30 October 2026, Anna Korwin-Piotrowska, a judge elected to Poland's Constitutional Tribunal by the current parliamentary majority, issued orders suspending the tribunal's president, Bogdan Święczkowski, and its vice-president, Bartłomiej Sochański, from their duties for one month[1,2,3]. Citing her seniority as a judge, she also took charge of the court herself[1]. The tribunal's official website then carried an order issued in the name of Judge Anna Korwin-Piotrowska acting in place of the President of the Constitutional Tribunal[13]. The tribunal is a 15-member court whose composition has been in dispute since the Law and Justice party (PiS) took power in 2015[1].

The order gives as its legal basis article 130 of the law on the organisation of common courts, read together with article 19 of the act on the status of Constitutional Tribunal judges[2]. The tribunal's account on X responded that there had been an unlawful takeover of the court's website, that Święczkowski remained chief justice and that Korwin-Piotrowska was not a judge of the tribunal[1]. Another post said that "All persons participating in these actions are committing the crime of a coup d'état"[6]. The court's two official channels were thus giving opposite accounts of who was in charge of it.

Police said officers entered the premises of the tribunal after incidents outside the court, including the throwing of dangerous objects at police[4,5]. On Friday evening seven newly elected judges were escorted into the building by the State Protection Service through a gate connecting the court to the prime minister's chancellery[1]. Supporters of PiS, which governed Poland from 2015 to 2023, gathered outside, some chanting "Tusk traitor"[1,6]. Notes from Poland, an English-language news site, reported that Święczkowski's supporters cut through the fence with a power tool, and that police blocked him from entering[1]. According to the Kyiv Independent, three people were detained after breaching the perimeter fencing[7].

A legal offensive ran alongside the events at the gate. Waldemar Żurek, who is both justice minister and prosecutor general, submitted five motions on the same day asking the tribunal to lift judicial immunity, four of them concerning Święczkowski and one concerning Sochański[7,8]. The motions run to 224 pages and were sent with 50 volumes of case files[7,8]. Prime Minister Donald Tusk defended the operation, writing that "Restoring the rule of law is our duty" and "There is no other way"[1]. PiS politicians, including the party leader Jarosław Kaczyński, accused his government of carrying out a coup on the tribunal[4,5].

2The president's return and a night inside the court

President Karol Nawrocki, an ally of PiS, was flying to Senegal when the suspension became known[5]. He turned his aircraft back in mid-flight, writing that "At a moment like this, the President must be in Poland"[5,6]. Al Jazeera reported that he cut the trip short to join protesters outside the court, where critics were describing the government's move as "a coup in the court"[14]. In Nawrocki's account, the police at the tribunal were coercive forces sent there by the government[10]. The confrontation therefore set the head of state against a cabinet that also controls the prosecution service through Żurek.

In the early hours of Saturday 31 October, Nawrocki entered the tribunal building with Zbigniew Kapiński, the First President of the Supreme Court[6]. The tabloid Super Express reported that his chief of staff, Zbigniew Bogucki, was also with him, and that the president pushed past judges in a corridor, among them Krystian Markiewicz, while Judge Maciej Berek filmed the encounter[11]. According to the same report, when Korwin-Piotrowska told the president that they were judges of the tribunal, he replied that they were not, and Bogucki accused her of committing a coup d'état[11]. The paper reported that Żurek called it unacceptable for a person protected by immunity to force entry and attack judges[11]. Most of the detail of this confrontation comes from that one outlet.

In a statement reported by the daily Rzeczpospolita at 06:12 on 31 October, Nawrocki said that the night had brought a breach of Poland's constitutional order and a forcible takeover of a constitutional organ of the state[10]. He called for legal order to be restored and for the coercive forces sent to the tribunal by the government to leave[10]. He said he had let Sochański, whom he described as the lawfully serving vice-president, into the building[10]. He added that Kapiński likewise did not recognise as lawful the actions of those he said were usurping power at the court[10]. Citing threats to Poland's internal security, he called urgent consultations with representatives of the parliamentary parties for the same day[10].

Kapiński told the broadcaster Kanał Zero that he was "appalled" by what was "undoubtedly a coup d'etat"[1]. Kaczyński wrote that Poland was becoming "a police state" and was on a path towards authoritarianism[1,15]. Jakub Kumoch, Poland's ambassador to China, resigned, saying that "it is no longer possible for me to continue serving as ambassador"[7]. The Indian news agency ANI reported that Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski defended the government's actions at a meeting of G20 foreign ministers in Atlanta[15].

3A dispute rooted in the appointments of 2015

The roots of the present conflict lie in a series of appointments made in 2015[16]. Before leaving office that year, the outgoing government led by the Civic Platform party had parliament appoint five judges to the tribunal, although it was entitled to fill only three seats[16]. President Andrzej Duda then refused to swear in three lawfully elected judges, and the new PiS-controlled parliament elected three replacements, including Mariusz Muszyński, to seats that were already filled[16]. Notes from Poland describes the following years as a period in which PiS appointed judges it controlled to the court, undermining its independence[1].

On 7 May 2021 the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg ruled in the case of Xero Flor v Poland that the tribunal had not acted as a "tribunal established by law" under article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights[16]. The reason was that Muszyński, who sat on the panel that rejected the company's complaint, had been appointed to a seat that was already occupied[16]. Julia Przyłębska, the tribunal's president at the time, said the ruling had "no basis whatsoever in the acts of international law"[16].

On 18 December 2025 the Court of Justice of the European Union went further, finding that the tribunal does not meet EU standards of independence and impartiality[9]. It cited irregularities in the December 2015 appointments of Henryk Cioch, Lech Morawski and Muszyński, and in Przyłębska's appointment as president in December 2016[9]. It also found that the tribunal had unlawfully rejected interim measures ordered by the EU court, including the suspension of the Supreme Court's disciplinary chamber[9]. According to a summary published on a University of Wisconsin Law School website, the tribunal rejected the judgment and disputed the EU court's authority[17].

Tusk called the ruling a "green light" and said: "From now on we can try to fix the Constitutional Tribunal by systematically appointing new judges as their terms expire"[18]. He also said the restoration would "take time"[18]. His coalition, in power since 2023, had refused to recognise the tribunal's legitimacy, ignored its rulings and declined to fill vacancies until 2026[1]. By December 2025, after two judges had departed, only nine of the 15 seats were occupied[19]. That gave the coalition, which holds a majority in the lower house of parliament, the chance to change the tribunal's composition.

4Eight new judges and an oath that was never received

On 13 March 2026 the Sejm, the lower house of parliament, elected six judges to nine-year terms: Krystian Markiewicz, Maciej Taborowski, Marcin Dziurda, Anna Korwin-Piotrowska, Dariusz Szostek and Magdalena Bentkowska[3,20]. The ruling coalition backed all six, while PiS and the far-right Confederation voted against them[3]. Judges must take an oath before the president, and Polish law does not say what happens if the president refuses to receive it[3]. Before the vote, Bogucki stated that "Only the president can administer the oath to judges of the Constitutional Tribunal"[3].

On 1 April Nawrocki swore in Szostek and Bentkowska but refused the other four, who took their oaths at a ceremony in parliament on 9 April[19,21]. The four also sent written oaths to the president's office[22]. The president questioned the legality of their election by the Sejm and asked the tribunal itself to rule on whether they should be admitted[22]. Święczkowski refused to let them begin work[22]. Dziurda, Korwin-Piotrowska, Markiewicz and Taborowski then applied to the European Court of Human Rights, which in May provisionally granted an interim measure in their favour[20,22]. It required Poland to "ensure that its competent authorities refrain from hindering the taking up and exercise of judicial duties" by the four[22].

A spokeswoman for the tribunal said the Strasbourg court did not have authority to adjudicate on Poland's constitutional structure, while Tusk said the state was "obliged to remove all obstacles preventing them from adjudicating"[22]. In September prosecutors charged the director of the tribunal's chancellery and the commander of its security service with abuse of power and with maliciously and persistently violating employee rights over the exclusion of the judges; both pleaded not guilty[23]. Żurek said at the time that "the gates of the tribunal are not the gates of a private fortress"[23]. On 24 September Święczkowski opened disciplinary proceedings against three other new judges who had boycotted sessions in solidarity, a step that could lead to their removal[23].

By October parliament had elected eight new judges during 2026, and Nawrocki had sworn in only three of them[24]. On 14 October Maciej Berek, whom Tusk has called his "right-hand man", became the fifth judge to take the oath in parliament without the president[24]. Nawrocki objected that Berek lacked evidence of ten years' practice as a legal counsel, and that he had moved straight from the cabinet to the court[24,25]. Bogucki called the ceremony "grotesque" and "a sad day for Polish democracy"[24].

5The criminal case behind the immunity requests

Behind the suspension lies a criminal investigation that predates the election of the new judges in March 2026[3,26]. A tribunal judge can be prosecuted only if the tribunal's general assembly of judges lifts his or her immunity, so the request is decided by the very body whose leaders are under scrutiny[8]. Żurek first asked for consent to prosecute Święczkowski on 30 September 2025, in connection with an investigation by a team of the National Prosecutor's Office into the use of Pegasus spyware[26]. Prosecutors allege that while serving as national prosecutor under the PiS government, Święczkowski abused his power by directing another official to review surveillance material concerning Roman Giertych, a lawyer and close associate of Tusk[27].

On 15 October 2025 the general assembly refused its consent[26]. According to the National Prosecutor's Office, eleven judges took part, including Święczkowski, and all ten who voted opposed lifting his immunity[26]. Notes from Poland reported that Sochański chaired the session and that Święczkowski stayed out of the discussion and the vote[27]. Święczkowski said that all his actions had been lawful and within his duties, and called the request "a scandalous political stunt"[27].

The prosecution did not accept the outcome. In a statement dated 3 December 2025 it said that only three of the ten voting judges had read the classified evidence, which filled ten volumes, and that none had examined all of the material[26]. It argued that the decision lacked legal validity because judges whose appointments are contested had taken part[26]. Rzeczpospolita reported that the dispute behind the new motions again centres on the Pegasus investigation[8].

Żurek has also sought to lift the immunity of Święczkowski and Sochański on the ground that they failed to fulfil their duties by preventing judges from performing their work[4,5]. The BBC reported that the government aims to strip both men of immunity so that criminal charges can be brought against them[28]. The five motions are therefore addressed to an assembly that has already refused once and whose membership is itself the core of the dispute. The published orders do not make clear whether the suspension is meant to change who sits in that assembly, or who convenes it, when the motions come to be decided.

6Rival legal readings of the suspension

According to a summary by the legal news portal Prawo.pl, Korwin-Piotrowska's order sets out three grounds[2]. It says Święczkowski failed to convene the general assembly to adopt the 2027 budget, which kept five judges out of the process and blocked the budget[2]. It says he prevented five newly elected judges, Korwin-Piotrowska among them, from performing their duties, in breach of the Strasbourg court's interim measure[2]. It also cites publicly delivered statements of an overtly political character[2].

Sikorski argued that "The outgoing president was preventing the duly elected majority from working—from passing judgments, interpreting laws, or even adopting their own budget," and that "action had to be taken to enable the Tribunal to function once again"[15]. Tusk wrote that "After years of lawlessness under PiS, this process is difficult, at times even painful, and requires decisive action"[4]. On 13 October the Venice Commission, a Council of Europe body, had found that the president must swear in judges chosen by parliament without delay and has no power to review their election[24]. It added that "it is constitutionally justified to permit the assumption of office without the President's participation where the President unlawfully refuses to administer the oath"[25]. Its opinions are advisory rather than binding[25].

The chosen legal basis has drawn objections from outside the PiS camp. Marcin Matczak, a constitutional law scholar, said that "this legal basis is nonexistent for a million reasons"[1]. He argued that article 130 lets only the justice minister suspend judges of the common courts, that the minister has no supervisory power over the tribunal, and that tribunal judges are subject only to the constitution under its article 195[2,12]. In his reading, the suspension breached about five constitutional provisions and improperly extended executive power over the judiciary[12]. He also said that the rule of law cannot be restored by force, and the BBC reported his warning that the operation could bury the tribunal for two decades[12,28].

Writing before the suspension, the commentator Grzegorz Sroczyński warned that a forced takeover "will not be recognised by the President or the opposition, may even cause problems with the US administration"[25]. The first part of that warning has already come true: the president and the head of the Supreme Court have said they do not recognise the new acting leadership[10]. With two leaderships each claiming to be lawful, any ruling issued by either is likely to be contested by the other camp.

Uncertainties and open questions

Reliance on article 130 of the common courts law to suspend judges of the tribunal is contested, and the legal scholar Marcin Matczak has argued that the action breached several provisions of the Constitution[2,12]. Sources disagree on the number of disputed judges: RTÉ reported that Nawrocki refused to swear in three of six judges nominated by parliament, while Notes from Poland reports that he swore in three of the eight elected in 2026[5,24]. The claim that objects were thrown at officers comes from the police, no reliable count of protesters has been published, and the Kyiv Independent reported three detentions[4,7]. Much of the detail of the president's night inside the building comes from a single tabloid report[11]. The content of the five immunity motions has not been published, and the allegations against Święczkowski, which he denies, have not been tested in court[8,27]. The prosecution's argument that the 2025 assembly vote is invalid is the view of one party to the dispute[26]. The Strasbourg measure is provisional and the Venice Commission's opinion is advisory[20,25]. It is also unknown how the one-month suspension will end, and whether any body accepted by both camps will rule on it.

Conclusion

The events of 30 and 31 October turned a decade-old legal dispute into a physical contest for a court building. The government and its allies argue that the tribunal's leaders defied a European court and blocked lawfully elected judges, so that action had to be taken to let the tribunal function[2,15]. The president and the head of the Supreme Court describe the same events as a coup, the president also calling them a forcible seizure of a constitutional organ, while the PiS leader, Jarosław Kaczyński, says Poland has become a police state[1,10]. Legal critics such as Matczak reject the legal basis chosen for the suspension and argue that the rule of law cannot be restored by force[12]. European courts have questioned the legitimacy of the tribunal's PiS-era composition, but no body accepted by both camps has ruled on the steps taken this week. Until one does, Poland's constitutional court has two rival leaderships, and its decisions will carry the authority that each side is willing to grant them.

References

  1. Notes from Poland. Chaos at Poland’s constitutional court as government-backed judges seek to oust chief justice. Notes from Poland; 30 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the one-month suspension, Korwin-Piotrowska's takeover, the X account statements, the SOP escort of seven judges, the fence cut with a power tool, the quotes from Tusk, Kapiński, Kaczyński and Matczak, and the background on PiS appointments and the coalition's non-recognition of the court. ↩
  2. Prawo.pl. Spór o Trybunał Konstytucyjny, Anna Korwin-Piotrowska zawiesza w czynnościach Święczkowskiego. Prawo.pl; 30 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the legal basis of the order (article 130 with article 19), its three stated grounds, the one-month period and Matczak's article 195 objection. ↩
  3. Notes from Poland. Polish ruling coalition picks six judges for constitutional court but faces potential standoff with president. Notes from Poland; 13 Mar 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the names of the six judges, their nine-year terms, the voting pattern, the legal gap on refused oaths and Bogucki's quote. ↩
  4. NBC News. Polish president turns back from Senegal trip as top court chief suspended. NBC News; 30 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedSupports the police statement on dangerous objects, Tusk's longer quote, Żurek's reason for the immunity requests and the PiS coup accusation. ↩
  5. RTÉ News. Polish riot police deployed after court chief suspended. RTÉ; 30 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the police account, Nawrocki's Senegal trip and quote, Żurek's immunity request, the PiS coup claims and the 'three of six' judge count. ↩
  6. Euronews. Polish president turns back mid-flight amid court 'coup d'état' claims. Euronews; 30 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the tribunal's 'coup d'état' post, the 'Tusk traitor' chants, Nawrocki's quote on returning, and his early-Saturday entry with Kapiński. ↩
  7. The Kyiv Independent. Polish president cuts short foreign trip as constitutional crisis escalates in Warsaw. The Kyiv Independent; 31 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the five immunity motions (four and one) with 50 volumes of files, the three detentions, police blocking Święczkowski and Kumoch's resignation quote. ↩
  8. Biskupski R. Bogdan Święczkowski może stracić immunitet. Waldemar Żurek złożył cztery wnioski. Rzeczpospolita; 30 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the five motions of 224 pages with 50 volumes, the link to the Pegasus investigation and the rule that the tribunal's general assembly decides on immunity. ↩
  9. Polskie Radio. EU court rules Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal lacks independence. Polskie Radio (Polish public radio); 18 Dec 2025. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the CJEU finding of 18 December 2025 on independence, the named irregular appointments of 2015 and 2016, and the rejection of interim measures. ↩
  10. Rzeczpospolita. Karol Nawrocki wydał oświadczenie w sprawie sytuacji w Trybunale Konstytucyjnym. Rzeczpospolita; 31 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedSupports the content of Nawrocki's statement of 31 October, including the call for coercive forces to withdraw, Sochański's admission, Kapiński's non-recognition and the urgent consultations. ↩
  11. Super Express. Prezydent Karol Nawrocki wkroczył w nocy do Trybunału Konstytucyjnego. Padły oskarżenia o zamach stanu. Super Express; 31 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedSupports the account of the corridor confrontation, the exchange with Korwin-Piotrowska, Bogucki's coup accusation and Żurek's response. ↩
  12. Mikulski J. Prof. Marcin Matczak reaguje na wydarzenia w Trybunale Konstytucyjnym. „Nie ma podstaw”. Rzeczpospolita; Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports Matczak's arguments on the minister's lack of supervisory power, the breach of about five constitutional provisions, the extension of executive power and his view that the rule of law cannot be restored by force. ↩
  13. Trybunał Konstytucyjny. Zarządzenie sędzi Trybunału Konstytucyjnego Anny Korwin-Piotrowskiej zastępującej Prezesa Trybunału Konstytucyjnego. Trybunał Konstytucyjny (Constitutional Tribunal of Poland); 30 Oct 2026. Official statement✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the statement that the tribunal's website carried an order issued by Korwin-Piotrowska acting in place of the tribunal's president. ↩
  14. Al Jazeera. Poland’s president joins protest amid constitutional crisis at top court. Al Jazeera; 31 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the report that Nawrocki cut short his trip to join protesters and that critics called the move 'a coup in the court'. ↩
  15. ANI. Action had to be taken to enable the tribunal to function once again: Poland's Foreign Minister Sikorski on constitutional crisis. The Tribune; 31 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedSupports Sikorski's quotes at the G20 meeting in Atlanta and Kaczyński's 'police state' remark. ↩
  16. Notes from Poland. Poland’s constitutional court not a “tribunal established by law”, rules ECHR. Notes from Poland; 7 May 2021. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the 2015 appointment history, the Xero Flor ruling of 7 May 2021 concerning Muszyński, and Przyłębska's response. ↩
  17. University of Wisconsin Law School. European Court Finds Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal Violated EU Law. University of Wisconsin Law School; 18 Dec 2025. Analysis or opinion✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the statement that the tribunal rejected the CJEU judgment and disputed the EU court's authority. ↩
  18. Polskie Radio. EU court ruling opens path to fix Poland’s top court, PM says. Polskie Radio (Polish public radio); 18 Dec 2025. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports Tusk's 'green light' remark, his quote on appointing new judges and his statement that it would take time. ↩
  19. Notes from Poland. Polish parliament hosts swearing in of constitutional court judges in defiance of president. Notes from Poland; 9 Apr 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the nine of 15 seats filled after December 2025 and the oath ceremonies of 1 and 9 April 2026. ↩
  20. European Court of Human Rights. Interim measure granted concerning Poland. European Court of Human Rights; 6 May 2026. Official statement✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the 13 March 2026 election date and the provisional interim measure in Dziurda and Others v Poland. ↩
  21. International IDEA. Poland April 2026 – Global State of Democracy Initiative, Democracy Tracker. International IDEA; Apr 2026. Other✓ Link checkedSupports the oath ceremonies of 1 and 9 April 2026. ↩
  22. Notes from Poland. European court orders Polish constitutional tribunal to accept judges rejected by president. Notes from Poland; 6 May 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the written oaths, Nawrocki's objections and motion, Święczkowski's refusal, the wording of the interim measure, and the reactions of the tribunal spokeswoman and Tusk. ↩
  23. Notes from Poland. Polish constitutional court officials charged with preventing entry of new judges. Notes from Poland; 24 Sept 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the charges against two tribunal officials, their not-guilty pleas, Żurek's 'private fortress' quote and the disciplinary proceedings of 24 September. ↩
  24. Notes from Poland. New Polish constitutional court judge takes oath in defiance of president. Notes from Poland; 14 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the count of eight judges elected and three sworn in, Berek's oath on 14 October, Nawrocki's objections, Bogucki's quotes and the Venice Commission's 13 October findings. ↩
  25. Brussels Signal. Tusk moves to take over constitutional court by force. Brussels Signal; Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports Nawrocki's objection on Berek's experience, the quoted Venice Commission sentence, the advisory status of its opinion and Sroczyński's warning. ↩
  26. Prokuratura Krajowa. Komunikat o nierozpoznaniu przez Zgromadzenie Ogólne Sędziów Trybunału Konstytucyjnego wniosku o uchylenie immunitetu Bogdanowi Święczkowskiemu. Prokuratura Krajowa (National Prosecutor's Office), gov.pl; 3 Dec 2025. Official statement✓ Link checkedSupports the 30 September 2025 request linked to Pegasus, the 15 October 2025 vote, the claim that only three judges read the classified evidence, and the prosecution's argument that the decision is invalid. ↩
  27. Notes from Poland. Polish constitutional court rejects justice minister’s request to lift chief justice’s immunity. Notes from Poland; 17 Oct 2025. News report✓ Link checkedArchived copySupports the Giertych surveillance allegation, Sochański chairing the vote, Święczkowski's abstention and his denial and 'scandalous political stunt' quote. ↩
  28. Easton A. Police deployed during stand-off over control of Poland's top court. BBC News (syndicated by Yahoo News); 31 Oct 2026. News report✓ Link checkedSupports the report that the government sought to lift immunity to bring criminal charges, and Matczak's warning that the action could bury the tribunal for two decades. ↩