"On March 13th, the Sejm successfully elected six judges to the Constitutional Tribunal. However, the President of the Republic of Poland has not fulfilled his statutory obligation to swear in all elected judges of the Tribunal, having only sworn in two of them on April 1st," stated the Chancellery of the Sejm in its announcement.

"According to Article 194, Paragraph 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, judges of the Constitutional Tribunal are elected by the Sejm of the Republic of Poland. The President of the Republic of Poland's role, as stipulated by law, is to swear them in. The Head of State does not possess the competence to assess the correctness of the election. Refusal to swear in some of the elected judges has no legal basis and constitutes an usurpation of competence by the President of the Republic of Poland," it was emphasized.

"In the Polish legal system, it is not uncommon to appoint judges to the Constitutional Tribunal after the predecessor's term has expired," the announcement read.

"Judge Leon Kieres's term ended on July 23, 2021. The IX term of the Sejm elected Bogdan Święczkowski to the vacant position, which occurred only on February 8, 2022. Despite more than half a year (approx. 200 days) passing between these dates, the President of the Republic of Poland has not questioned the validity of Bogdan Święczkowski's election to the Constitutional Tribunal," it was stated.

The Chancellery of the Sejm also noted that "the election of several judges during a single session, or even on a single day, is not an extraordinary situation," and provided several examples of such occurrences from the past.

The Chancellery of the Sejm dismissed the argument that the President swore in only two of the six judges elected by the Sejm because two seats in the Constitutional Tribunal became vacant during Karol Nawrocki's term, calling it "extra-legal reasoning" that "leads to unacceptable consequences."

"This would mean that judicial positions vacated during President Andrzej Duda's term could never be filled in the Tribunal again. Such a situation causes obvious obstruction of the Tribunal's functioning and flagrantly limits, without any basis, the Sejm's creative function," the announcement read.

Further in the announcement, it was stated, among other things, that "on March 13, 2026, the Sejm of the Republic of Poland elected six Constitutional Tribunal judges to previously vacant positions. This procedure did not raise doubts not only from the parliamentary majority but also from the parliamentary opposition, which nominated candidates and subsequently supported them throughout the entire procedure."

"The commencement of a Constitutional Tribunal judge's term is not determined by the date of the previous judge's term expiry, but by the date of election by the Sejm. Each candidate was put to a vote individually for the six vacant positions," the Chancellery of the Sejm stated.

"All individuals elected to judicial positions on March 13, 2026, are judges of the Constitutional Tribunal and are in an identical legal situation. The refusal to swear in all but two of these individuals has no legal basis and constitutes an abuse of power," it was concluded.

"The Sejm elected six Constitutional Tribunal judges. The President only swore in two. Not because the law dictates it. Only because he decided so himself." - wrote Waldemar Żurek on X.

"The Constitution is clear. The Sejm elects Constitutional Tribunal judges. The President has no right to select them, like a goalkeeper. This is an usurpation of powers he DOES NOT HAVE. Because if the head of state can choose which laws to apply - it means that the law ceases to be binding for everyone." - he continued in his post.

"Mr. President, please use your moment of free time to open your calendar and set a date. Violating the Constitution is a serious matter." - he stated.

Sejm wybrał sześciu sędziów TK. Prezydent odebrał ślubowanie tylko od dwóch.

Nie dlatego, że tak stanowi prawo. Tylko dlatego, że tak sobie wymyślił.

Konstytucja jest jasna. Sędziów TK wybiera Sejm. Prezydent nie ma prawa ich selekcjonować, jak na bramce.

To uzurpacja…

— Waldemar Żurek (@w_zurek) April 3, 2026

- This law [on the status of the next of kin] does not violate the constitution. It is a law that is necessary to create due to numerous rulings from the ECHR and the CJEU which do not require Poland to introduce so-called marital equality, but rather require Poland to introduce a legal institution within which same-sex relationships could be recognized by the state - said Marcin Wiącek on Polsat News's "Graffiti".

- This relationship, which would be created as a result of an agreement concluded on the basis of this draft bill, if it were to come into force, would be a relationship not possessing the rights and obligations of marriage. Therefore, regardless of how Article 18 of the constitution is understood, [...] no matter which interpretation is considered, this construct created in this draft bill does not violate Article 18 - he assessed.

- Because even if we were to assume that Article 18 prohibits the creation of same-sex unions, even if they are named differently but possess the same status as marriage [...], the level of rights and obligations of partners or parties to this agreement [...] is incomparable to marriage - he continued.

- I will remind you that Borys Budka wanted to establish an investigative committee, stating that the Law and Justice government was buying too few vaccines. Mr. Szczerba appealed similarly [...] that too many vaccines were bought senselessly, he thundered at the time that the Polish government wasn't buying them, that it was buying too few, too slowly - said Michał Dworczyk on Trójka.

- At that time, the situation was such that, in order for vaccines to reach Poles as quickly as possible [...] these orders turned out to be excessively large in virtually all countries - he continued.

- We managed to reach an agreement with some suppliers. Pfizer was the only company that simply wanted to extort money, without undertaking any negotiations at all, which is why the matter was submitted as a report to the European Public Prosecutor's Office - he went on to say.

- We managed to negotiate agreements with other manufacturers. Pfizer did not want to negotiate; Pfizer simply wanted to make a typical grab for cash. That is why this case went to the prosecutor's office. Why it was withdrawn by Donald Tusk at the request of Mrs. von der Leyen, please ask Prime Minister Donald Tusk - he added.

"I don't feel we are being repressed, if you are talking about the circle of Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki's associates," Michał Dworczyk said on Trójka.

"Law and Justice is one of the largest political formations in Poland, we obviously have diverse views, there are different environments, and these views clash," he continued.

- The law provides no alternative here. The creators of the constitution, the creators of the laws, did not foresee such a situation [where the president would not invite constitutional judges for the swearing-in ceremony] - said Marcin Wiącek in "Graffiti" on Polsat News.

"Sooner or later, a court will have to rule on this"

- However, sooner or later, a court will have to rule on this matter. Because if a dispute arises between two state institutions, and one of such a fundamental nature, it will certainly end up before a court, whether national or European, at some point - he stated.

- Let's remember 2015, when three judges of the Constitutional Tribunal were not invited for the swearing-in ceremony. Disputes on national and European dockets are still ongoing in this regard - he noted.

"We are dealing with a situation defined by law as inaction by a public administration body"

- If the president does not perform the swearing-in ceremony, does not swear in the four judges of the Constitutional Tribunal, we are dealing with a situation defined by law as inaction by a public administration body - indicated the RPO (Commissioner for Human Rights).

- In this role, in which he acts here, the president is a public administration body in the so-called functional sense. […] This stems from the rulings of administrative courts. And there are certain legal avenues to determine the nature of this swearing-in and for a court to confirm what type of competence it is – whether […] it is a competence related to the role of symbolizing the majesty of the nation, or whether the president has some room for decision here - he continued.

- The President of the Republic of Poland represents the nation, but in various ways. Sometimes the President of the Republic of Poland represents the nation by making a decision on behalf of the nation. But sometimes the president represents the nation in such a way that a specific action is a symbol, symbolizing the majesty of the nation - said Marcin Wiącek on Polsat News's "Graffiti".

- In such situations, the president does not have the competence to make decisions. For example, the president calls elections for the Sejm and the Senate. For example, the president convenes the first session of the Sejm. And in the case of these competences, the president does not have a decision on whether to do so. They can make a decision regarding the date, of course, also within the framework set by the constitution - he explained.

- There is a certain set of competences where the president does not make decisions on behalf of the nation, but symbolizes that nation. Receiving the oath from a judge of the Constitutional Tribunal belongs to this second group. And here, there is no room for decision-making on whether a given person will be or will not be a judge of the Tribunal, because they already are a judge of the Constitutional Tribunal - he indicated.

- There is no justification for this decision, for me it is an incomprehensible decision. I have known Krzysztof Szczucki for years [...] he is an academic lecturer, one of the best and most balanced politicians - said Michał Dworczyk on Trójka, when asked why Krzysztof Szczucki was suspended from PiS without stating a reason.

- I do not have such knowledge and I don't really believe it - he continued, when asked about the fact that "it is being said in PiS that he is making a pact with Waldemar Żurek".

- Absolutely no such plans exist, it's an association, not a political formation, not a political party - said Michał Dworczyk in an interview with Renata Grochal on "Bez uników" on Trójka, when asked if Mateusz Morawiecki's association was preparation for leaving PiS.

- The term of office for a Constitutional Tribunal judge does not begin on the day of the oath. The term of office for a Constitutional Tribunal judge begins either on the day following the creation of a vacancy, or on the day of the Sejm's resolution on the election of a judge - said Marcin Wiącek on Polsat News' "Graffiti".

- This is because the constitution closes the catalogue of bodies involved in the election of a Constitutional Tribunal judge. This is exclusively the Sejm. The constitution mentions nothing about the president - he pointed out.

- Paulina Hennig-Kloska is not a signatory to the coalition agreement today. The coalition agreement protects all of us, but she is a minister in this government. We will vote, after talks with the coalition partners, as the coalition partners do, after joint consultations, we will vote responsibly - stated Katarzyna Pełczyńska-Nałęcz in "Jeden na jeden" on TVN24.

- The coalition agreement protects all ministers, and then it's not [a subject of] discussion at all. It's not about us being [obligated to defend], nobody is [obligated] at this moment, because they are not parties to the coalition agreement. Nevertheless, as I say, we will vote responsibly - she continued.

- For me, Prime Minister Morawiecki today is a part of PiS. These sorts of dances suggesting he's something else, and what's more, he is today a part of PiS that has Czarnek's face. In my opinion, this is PiS even more worrying than a few months ago - stated Katarzyna Pełczyńska-Nałęcz on TVN24's "Jeden na jeden" (One on One).

- I would also like to emphasize that there is no need in the Sejm resolution on the election of a Constitutional Tribunal judge to specify who they are replacing or which vacancy they will fill - stated Marcin Wiącek in "Graffiti" on Polsat News.

Commissioner for Civil Rights on Two Types of Resolutions

He explained: - In practice, we deal with two types of resolutions concerning the election of a Constitutional Tribunal judge. This depends on the timing of the election. Because sometimes, usually the election occurs before a vacancy arises, meaning while the previous judge is still in office. [...] That's how it should be. And then the resolution specifies the date. This is the day following the expiry of the predecessor's term.

- The second situation, which has also occurred many times in the past, is when a judge is elected after a vacancy has already opened, meaning after the term has expired. In such cases, the date is not specified in the resolution, as it is assumed to be the date of the resolution itself - he continued.

- We have two question marks here. Firstly, we will not do anything that could destabilize the Polish zloty under current conditions. The NBP's primary role is to protect our currency, and given the current times, the inviolability of the zloty, which truly must endure, is paramount - stated Katarzyna Pełczyńska-Nałęcz on TVN24's "Jeden na jeden".

- Secondly, this is a question of how much money we allocate to armaments. Of course, we must arm ourselves, that's an obvious certainty, but there's 5% of GDP, which is already a very large amount. Then there's the EU's SAFE [Stability and Growth Pact], which is very necessary and must be implemented. Should tens of billions of zlotys indeed go even further towards armaments, or do we, rather, need them for health, for science, for development? We lean towards the latter - she continued.

- The vacancies in the Constitutional Tribunal should be filled without delay. That is true, because as a result of delaying the appointment of judges, the continuity of the Constitutional Tribunal's functioning has undoubtedly been disrupted – said Marcin Wiącek in Polsat News' "Graffiti".

- However, this circumstance does not affect the validity of the legal basis for the appointment of six judges of the Constitutional Tribunal. Such situations have occurred in the past, where for various reasons there were delays in this regard, and that's just how it is – he continued.

- All six judges of the Constitutional Tribunal, elected on March 13th, should be sworn in - said Marcin Wiącek in an interview with Marcin Fijołek on Polsat News' "Graffiti".

- The President is trying to divide the coalition. He is selecting two judges out of the six elected by the Sejm, in accordance with PiS law, just to be clear, and he is swearing them in, while telling the remaining 4 "no." These are not the president's rights. If the Sejm has elected six, then the president swears in six, and here the president has somehow confused the rights he has with rights he apparently dreams of, but does not possess and are not written in the Constitution - stated Katarzyna Pełczyńska-Nałęcz on TVN24's "Jeden na jeden."

- This attempt to divide the coalition will not work for the president. We stand united on this matter - she continued.