The article is a continuation of the considerations presented by the author in the study ‘A Court of Peers – Political economy behind the triumph and crisis of the Polish Constitutional Court’ (‘The Voice of Law’ 2020, vol. 3, no. 5, item 6), in which it was indicated that the functioning of the Constitutional Court during the systemic transform- ation could be described by means of the ‘court of peers’ model, which was confirmed by historical analyses and patterns of formulating dissenting opinions. This article, however, is meant to deepen the analysis by proposing an alternative approach to the study of the process of ‘reaching a compromise’ in adjudicating panels of the Constitutional Court. Instead of traditional analyses of dissenting opinions, it uses the cases of the Constitutional Court in which more than one rapporteur was responsible for preparing the draft judgment and its main motives as well as written reasons.
PL
Opracowanie jest drugim tekstem Autora traktującym o roli Trybunału Konstytucyjnego w Polsce od jego powstania do współczesności. Tym razem Autor omawia orzeczenia TK wydane przez pełny skład Trybunału, ale tylko te, w których wyznaczono więcej niż jednego sprawozdawcę. Opracowanie nie jest analizą prawniczą. Autor pokazuje, jak w różnych okresach funkcjonowania TK ucierały się stanowiska z wykorzystaniem instytucji referentów.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.