Poland is facing a fresh political and judicial confrontation after a judge announced the suspension of Constitutional Tribunal President Bogdan Święczkowski. Prime Minister Donald Tusk says the court must operate independently and according to the constitution, while President Karol Nawrocki describes the move as a forced takeover. The dispute has prompted protests, police deployments and urgent political consultations in Warsaw.
Poland Faces Fresh Constitutional Crisis as Tusk and President Clash Over Top Court
Poland's political tensions have increased after Prime Minister Donald Tusk and President Karol Nawrocki exchanged opposing positions over the leadership and future of the country's Constitutional Tribunal.
The dispute escalated on Friday, October 30, when the tribunal announced that its longest-serving judge, Anna Korwin-Piotrowska, had suspended its president, Bogdan Święczkowski, and taken charge of the institution.
The announcement triggered protests outside the court in Warsaw and prompted Nawrocki to cut short a foreign trip and return to Poland.
On Saturday, October 31, Tusk sought to reassure the public that the tribunal would continue operating independently and in accordance with the country's constitution.
The president, however, described the events as a forced takeover of a constitutional institution.
The disagreement has exposed deeper divisions over judicial appointments, the independence of Poland's courts and the powers of the country's political institutions.
Tusk Says the Tribunal Must Operate Independently
In a televised address, Tusk said he was confident that the Constitutional Tribunal would continue functioning as required by law.
He stressed that the court should operate independently of him and the executive branch.
Tusk said the government's responsibility was to provide the tribunal with security and the conditions needed to carry out its work.
His administration argues that changes are necessary to restore the independence of the judiciary after years of disputes over appointments and political influence.
The prime minister's position is that the tribunal must recognise judges elected by the current parliamentary majority and allow them to perform their constitutional duties.
Writing on X, Tusk said restoring the rule of law was a difficult process that required decisive action.
His government has repeatedly argued that judicial reforms introduced under the previous Law and Justice government weakened the independence of important institutions.
President Nawrocki Calls It a Forced Takeover
President Karol Nawrocki strongly criticised the suspension of Święczkowski.
After learning about the developments on Friday night, Nawrocki turned back his plane while travelling to Senegal and returned to Warsaw.
He later visited the Constitutional Tribunal and issued a statement accusing the government of violating Poland's constitutional order.
A statement read by an aide outside the court described the events as a breach of public order and a forcible takeover of a constitutional body.
The president called for the restoration of what he considers the country's legal order and demanded that government security forces leave the tribunal's premises.
He also said he had helped the court's vice-president, Bartłomiej Sochański, gain access to the building.
Nawrocki subsequently invited representatives of parliamentary parties to urgent consultations at the presidential palace to discuss the situation.
The consultations took place on Saturday, October 31. However, representatives of Tusk's Civic Coalition did not attend, and no breakthrough was announced.
Protests and Police Presence Outside the Court
The leadership dispute quickly moved beyond political statements.
Riot police were deployed around the Constitutional Tribunal in central Warsaw as supporters of the opposing political camps gathered outside the building.
Hundreds of people protested against the suspension, with demonstrators demanding that Święczkowski be reinstated.
The Associated Press reported that police detained three protesters on Friday night after some demonstrators allegedly threw objects at officers and attempted to break through a security fence.
The protests continued into Saturday, with supporters of the opposition Law and Justice party among those gathered outside the court.
The situation has raised concerns about the possibility of further confrontation between supporters of the government and the president's political allies.
How Did Poland's Judicial Dispute Begin?
The current confrontation is connected to a disagreement that began in 2015 and has continued through successive governments.
At the centre of the dispute is the Constitutional Tribunal, which decides whether laws and other legal measures comply with Poland's constitution.
In 2015, the outgoing government and the incoming Law and Justice Party, commonly known as PiS, clashed over the appointment of five constitutional judges.
The dispute developed after the outgoing parliament appointed judges to positions that the incoming PiS government argued had been filled improperly.
PiS subsequently appointed its own candidates to some of those positions. The Constitutional Tribunal ruled that three of the outgoing parliament's appointments were valid, leading to questions over the legitimacy of some later appointments.
During its time in government from 2015 to 2023, PiS introduced changes to the judiciary and the way the Constitutional Tribunal operated.
Critics in Poland and across the European Union argued that the changes weakened judicial independence and increased political influence over the courts.
PiS defended its reforms, saying they were intended to improve and restructure the justice system.
The disagreements eventually involved European institutions, with European courts issuing rulings that raised concerns about the tribunal's composition and the independence of its judges.
Tusk's Government Has Tried to Reverse Earlier Judicial Changes
After taking office in 2023, Tusk's coalition made restoring the rule of law a central part of its programme.
The government argued that the Constitutional Tribunal needed to be reformed and that judges selected through the current parliamentary process should be allowed to take their positions.
However, these efforts have faced resistance from President Nawrocki and officials aligned with the previous governing party.
In 2026, parliament elected six judges to the Constitutional Tribunal. Nawrocki accepted the oaths of two but refused the remaining four, arguing that there were problems with the appointment process.
The government maintained that parliament had the authority to elect the judges and that the president should not prevent them from taking office.
The disagreement continued when some of the judges took their oaths before a notary in parliament rather than before the president.
The president's office and the tribunal's existing leadership rejected that procedure, arguing that the oaths had to be taken in the president's presence.
The dispute intensified in October when parliament appointed Maciej Berek to the tribunal. Critics questioned the appointment because of his previous connection to Tusk's government, arguing that it could undermine efforts to make the court less politically influenced.
The competing legal interpretations have made it increasingly difficult for Poland's political institutions to agree on the tribunal's composition and authority.
Why the Suspension Has Become So Controversial
The immediate crisis centres on whether Korwin-Piotrowska had the legal authority to suspend the tribunal's president and assume responsibility for its operations.
Euronews reported that the order issued on October 30 provided for a one-month suspension of duties for both Święczkowski and vice-president Sochański.
Korwin-Piotrowska said the measure was necessary to restore the tribunal's functioning and allow judges elected by parliament to carry out their responsibilities.
The existing leadership rejected the decision, arguing that there was no valid legal basis for suspending them. It also disputed the status of judges who had taken their oaths outside the presidential procedure.
The two sides therefore disagree not only about who should lead the tribunal but also about which judges are legally entitled to sit on it.
This is why the dispute has become bigger than a normal disagreement over appointments. It involves questions about the constitutional limits of presidential authority, parliamentary powers and judicial independence.
European Commission Calls for Acceptance of New Judges
The crisis has also attracted attention from European institutions.
According to Al Jazeera, which cited the AFP news agency, the European Commission urged Nawrocki on Saturday to accept the nominations of judges at the centre of the dispute.
The European Union has previously raised concerns about judicial independence in Poland, particularly during the 2015–2023 period when PiS was in government.
The United States Ambassador to Poland, Tom Rose, also called for calm from all sides.
He warned that Poland did not need a confrontation that could escalate into a more serious political crisis.
These reactions show that the dispute is being watched beyond Poland because of its potential implications for the country's legal system and its relationship with European institutions.
What Happens Next?
As of November 1, 2026, the confrontation remains unresolved.
President Nawrocki has held consultations with political parties, while Tusk's government continues to defend its efforts to restore judicial independence.
The court's leadership dispute is also expected to remain a major issue in the coming days.
Euronews reported that Korwin-Piotrowska planned to convene a general assembly of tribunal judges on November 3, 2026. That meeting could become another important stage in the dispute over the court's leadership and composition.
The wider political consequences are also significant. Poland is approaching another parliamentary election cycle, and the conflict could deepen divisions between Tusk's governing coalition and the national-conservative opposition.
For now, the central questions remain unresolved: who has the lawful authority to lead the Constitutional Tribunal, which judges are entitled to serve, and how can the institution regain public confidence and operate without continued political confrontation?
The answers could shape Poland's justice system and its political direction in the months ahead.
Sources and further reading:
- Reuters – Polish PM Tusk vows support for tribunal amid court crisis
- Associated Press – Tusk defends suspension of Poland's Constitutional Tribunal president
- Al Jazeera – Polish president holds crisis talks in court standoff
- Euronews – Poland's Constitutional Tribunal crisis explained
- Office of the President of Poland – Statement by President Karol Nawrocki