The parties empowered to lodge a constitutional complaint under the Polish model are defined in Article 79(1) of the Polish Constitution, stating that: “Everyone whose constitutional freedoms or rights have been infringed, shall have the right to appeal to the Constitutional Tribunal (...). The above quoted article is considered to have the fundamental significance in the process of identification of the parties entitled to lodge a constitutional complaint, so in other words, provides a clear answer to the question who can effectively lodge such a complaint in order for the adequate proceedings to be officially opened (however – which is explainedin detail in this article – having fulfilled certain specifi ed objective conditions).

On February 17, 2008, Kosovo declared independence. Over twelve years after the adoption of the Declaration of Independence, the issue of universal, international acknowledgment of Kosovo still has not been resolved. The foundation for the establishment of the Republic of Kosovo was international society, which created the legal framework for the future statehood of Kosovo. The problem of the functioning of the constitutional judiciary was one of the key issues during the creation of the basic law of the Republic of Kosovo. This article s to analyze the constitutional position of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Kosovo in the state system established under the Constitution of 2008. It presents the composition of the Court, its competence, and principles of organization and functioning. The solution applied in the Kosovo basic law fits into the broadly understood model of the European constitutional judiciary.

The Ombudsman and the Organs of Judicial Power

The author shows that, in order to protect rights and freedoms, the Ombudsman, with the help of various instruments and depending on the infringements found, undertakes actions with organs of the judiciary, on which obligations concerning the protection of human rights and other subjects have been imposed. This article reviews the forms of the Ombudsman’s relations with the Supreme Court, the Supreme Administrative Court, the Constitutional Tribunal, and common courts. Their aim is to raise the level of respect for human and civil rights. In this context the thesis of the article is as follows: in view of structural, legal and organisational defects of the state, the Ombudsman notes that new threats to human and civil rights appear, freedoms or rights granted to them are often taken away in a manner inconsistent with constitutional standards, and public authorities exceed the sphere of their powers in an expcessive manner. Allegations made in complaints against public authorities are often verified by the Ombudsman in the course of inquiries with his participation. The Ombudsman keeps his distance from these bodies, which enables him to influence them in the field of human rights protection, and above all to influence the individuals subordinate to them.

Constitutional complaint and allegations of breaches of the legislative procedure

I am in favour of the possibility of questioning the course of the legislative process in a constitutional complaint. The objection/the allegation could only concern the procedure of adopting a normative act containing a provision constituting the legal basis of an act of applying the law. The act of applying the law must concern the constitutional rights or freedoms of the complainant. With the current procedural regulation, I believe that there is an obligation to examine this issue ex officio by the Constitutional Tribunal. Practice shows that the Tribunal does not examine the correctness of the legislative process in the proceedings initiated by the complaint, neither on the allegation of the applicant nor ex officio.

A Constitutional Complaint as an Instrument for Protecting Individual Electoral Rights – Comments in the Context of Constitutional Complaints Considered by the Constitutional Tribunal in 2012–2023

It seems that currently any attempt to undertake a substantive assessment of the activity of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal, especially after 2015, is doomed to the need to address the problem of the ongoing constitutional crisis in Poland. Nevertheless, the analysis of statistical data allows us to put forward the thesis that the “popularity” of the constitutional complaint as a means of protecting individual freedoms and rights – at least seemingly – has not been completely wasted even in these difficult conditions. It can be concluded that a constitutional complaint is not a commonly used instrument for the protection of an individual’s electoral rights. Nevertheless, given the constitutional problems raised in the constitutional complaints, the structure of this instrument of protection of the constitutional freedoms and rights of the individual prevents effective protection (ie. the possibility of restoring) the infringed electoral rights of the individual.

Gloss on the Decision of the Constitutional Tribunal of July 4, 2023, file ref. no. SK 78/19

The gloss concerns the decision of the Constitutional Tribunal in case file ref. no. SK 78/19, in which the Tribunal discontinued the proceedings based on a constitutional complaint filed by a limited liability company. The Tribunal found that a constitutional complaint cannot be lodged by a legal person due to the location of Art. 79 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland in Chapter II of the Constitution entitled “Freedoms, rights and obligations of man and citizen”. This view is obviously wrong, and the argumentation presented in the justification for this decision is selective. In the case law of the Tribunal, the ability of legal persons to lodge a constitutional complaint is well established, which also raises no doubts in the doctrine. The position expressed by the Tribunal in this decision exposes the rights of collective entities to a limitation.

Constitutional Reformism. On the Independence and Effectiveness of the Constitutional Tribunal

The focus of remedial actions to align the system with constitutional democracy standards is on restoring the Constitutional Tribunal’s independence. However, this is just a minimum step. For the reform to benefit the state and citizens, it must not only repair post-2015 damages but also modernize the legal environment. The article examines parliamentary bills on the Constitutional Tribunal and and the Constitutional Tribunal Introductory Provisions, submitted on 6 March 2024, alongside a constitutional amendment bill from 56 senators submitted at the same time. The authors suggest expanding reform efforts, using constitutional reformism, which integrates law, political science, and public life practices, to propose solutions for improving the state’s quality.