The session, held in the Supreme Court building in Warsaw on Wednesday, broke down over which judges were permitted to sit, raising concerns about whether the body has a quorum to proceed.
In July, Polish prosecutors requested the lifting of judicial immunity for Manowska, opening the door to potential criminal charges.
The State Tribunal is a judicial body which rules on the constitutional liability of officials holding the highest offices in the country.
Announcing the delay after two hours of arguments and breaks, senior Tribunal member Józef Zych said the court would first hear a three-judge panel’s report on judicial recusals and then consider motions filed during the disrupted meeting.
The dispute began when a three-judge panel led by Piotr Andrzejewski, with Zych and Piotr Sak, ruled last week to exclude 12 Tribunal members from the Manowska case because prosecutors had previously questioned them as witnesses in a related inquiry.
Shortly before Wednesday’s start time, additional judges arrived, and took seats in their robes.
Opening the session, Judge Andrzejewski declared the hearing a meeting of the three-judge panel and greeted colleagues “excluded in the case.”
Judge Sak countered that “only the three judges are authorized today,” telling those just seated that, despite their robes, they were not judges for purposes of the case because they had been formally excluded.
The exchange triggered a series of statements and interruptions.
Court staff and police asked everyone to leave, prompting journalists to demand a formal statement from the bench.
Around 2 p.m., 11 judges returned, and Judge Zych set the new date. Judge Andrzejewski did not reappear, state news agency PAP reported.
At issue is whether members questioned as witnesses can sit in a case tied to matters they reported or observed.
The panel applied provisions of Poland’s Code of Criminal Procedure that are used “appropriately” in Tribunal proceedings, which state a judge is excluded if he or she was a witness in the same case.
The National Public Prosecutor’s Office disputes that reading, arguing it could make the Tribunal permanently unable to decide cases whenever alleged offenses involve its own members or its internal work.
The underlying request to lift Manowska’s immunity was filed by the Internal Affairs Department of the National Public Prosecutor’s Office and covers three strands. One concerns an allegation of failure to perform duties by not convening a Tribunal session in 2024. That line of inquiry began more than a year ago after eight Tribunal members wrote to the National Public Prosecutor, and prosecutors later questioned some of them as witnesses.
Several judges said the September 22 sitting would focus on a preliminary legal question: to what extent criminal procedure rules apply in Tribunal cases and what “appropriate” application means in this dispute.
Tribunal member Przemysław Rosati said he expects a full-bench session and noted that the law allows the parliamentary Speaker to consider ending a member’s mandate if that person refuses to perform required duties.
Another member, Maciej Zaborowski, called for a “real discussion” among judges and said Wednesday’s turmoil “very seriously damaged” the Tribunal’s authority.
The Tribunal of State is Poland’s constitutional court for trying top officials for alleged violations of the law. Its decisions on immunity determine whether prosecutors may bring charges to an ordinary criminal court.
Whether the Manowska case can move forward now appears to depend on how the Tribunal resolves the clash over recusals and restores a workable bench for the hearing on September 22.
Manowska, a former deputy justice minister and legal academic, has served as a Supreme Court judge since 2018 and was appointed chief justice in 2020.
The case comes amid broader efforts to address the legacy of controversial judicial reforms introduced under Poland’s previous right-wing government, which critics say undermined judicial independence.
(rt/gs)
Source: PAP