Court Rules Against Prof. Ślebzak in Constitutional Tribunal Pay Claim

The Warsaw-Śródmieście District Court has dismissed a lawsuit filed by law professor Krzysztof Ślebzak against the Constitutional Tribunal, ruling that his failure to take an oath prevents him from claiming judicial retirement benefits.

Court Denies Judicial Status Without Oath

The District Court for Warsaw-Śródmieście ruled that Prof. Krzysztof Ślebzak, elected to the Constitutional Tribunal in 2015, is not entitled to judicial retirement benefits. Judge Adam Pruszyński explained that because the plaintiff never took the formal oath of office, no official employment relationship was ever established between him and the Tribunal.

The court emphasized that the labor court is not tasked with rectifying constitutional grievances of the executive branch through wage-related statutes. The judge noted that the oath acts as a constitutive element required to integrate a chosen individual into the organizational and legal structure of the court.

A Decade of Constitutional Conflict

The lawsuit is rooted in the 2015 dispute over the selection of judges to the Constitutional Tribunal. In October 2015, the Sejm elected five candidates, including Ślebzak, to fill positions. However, the subsequent parliamentary majority later declared these elections void and elected five different candidates, who were then sworn in by President Andrzej Duda.

While a December 2015 Tribunal ruling validated the selection of three of the judges from the first group—including Ślebzak—they were never administered the required oath by the President. The court now maintains that while the original election was legal, the absence of the oath prevented the formal assumption of office.

Implications and Potential Recourse

The current verdict is not yet final. Prof. Ślebzak stated he would decide on a potential appeal after reviewing the written justification of the ruling. The court suggested that a lawsuit for damages might have been a more appropriate path for addressing grievances related to the prevention of taking office.

The ongoing legal complexities regarding judicial appointments have recently resurfaced with new selections and disputes over the procedure of taking oaths before the President. Several newly elected judges have turned to the European Court of Human Rights, which issued an interim measure in May urging Poland to facilitate the assumption of judicial duties.