Evident groundlessness constitutional complaint

Grounds of constitutional complaints admissibility have in majority formal character. According to article 77.3.3 The Constitutional Tribunal Act of 25 June 2015, the Tribunal shall issue a decision on refusal to proceed with an application of a constitutional complaint, if an application or a constitutional complaint are manifestly unfounded. Evident groundlessness is constitutes a substantial requirement od admissibility. Since it has a character of a general clause, its meaning is determined in the process of application of law. Any doubts whether the complaint is evidently groundless, should result with its consideration in regular proceedings, and full examination of its legitimacy. The possibility of the substantive examination of complaints grounds, at the preliminary stage has an exceptional character, and should be given restrictive interpretation. The practice based on the opposite assumption could change constitutional complaints role as a remedy for constitutional rights and freedoms infringement.

The admissibility of use of torture as a method of struggling  against terrorism in the light of Constitutional,  International and European law standards

Regulations of Constitutional, international and European law provide that torturing of human being if fully prohibited. There is no any reason that could justify such an act. The author of the article analyzes a problem if it is possible to legalize torture of a terrorist to achieve information which are necessary to avoid a threat caused by this offender. In this situation – torture is the only way to get knowledge about a prepared act of terror. The author claims that provisions of Polish Constitution generally prohibit the use of torture However, the Constitution permits to establish legal exceptions to this restriction. The 31th article of the Constitution provides that each Constitutional right or freedom may be limited by a statute when it is necessary in a democratic state for the protection of its security or public order. The author also finds, that International Agreements binding upon Poland absolutely prohibit to use torture against terrorists. Treaties don’t include any provisions that would legalize any exceptions to this rule. The Republic of Poland is supposed to respect international law binding upon it. Summing up, organs of authority of the Republic cannot be authorized to use torture against any offender in any situation. Especially the Parliament mustn’t establish any law act that allows to torture a human being because it leads to a violation of binding international treaties.

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.