Results found: 1

Search results

Search:
in the keywords: presidential act of appointing a judge

Sort By:

Limit search:

Glosa do postanowienia Naczelnego Sądu Administracyjnego z 27 stycznia 2020 r., sygn. akt I OSK 1917/18

100%

Dobrowolski M.

Przegląd Sejmowy

2020

issue 2(157)

190–200

With its decision ref. No. I OSK 1917/18, the Supreme Administrative Court dismissed the motion for exclusion of a judge on the basis of the defectiveness of the appointment of the “new” National Council of the Judiciary. The Court pointed out that the reasons for a motion are decided by the circumstances of a “speci c case”, and not its “general nature” and referred to the traditional, constitutionally justi ed signi cance of the President’s act of appointing a judge (a person authorized to adjudicate). An opposite decision would lead to far-reaching systemic consequences: (a) it would establish judicial oversight of the President’s discretio- nary acts, thus far inacceptable; (b) it would transfer the “burden of proof” (of a judge’s lack of impartiality) from the party requesting exclusion of a judge; (c) it would change the nature of the motion, which would become an instrument in the “battle” for the desired nominating procedure for a judge. Hence, it shall be stated that the formation of the system of the Na- tional Council of the Judiciary and the nominating procedure is of general nature and as a rule abstracts from the circumstances of a speci c case.

Refine search results

1 Przegląd Sejmowy

1 Dobrowolski M.

1 2020

Search results

Glosa do postanowienia Naczelnego Sądu Administracyjnego z 27 stycznia 2020 r., sygn. akt I OSK 1917/18