Prof. Marek Safjan said that the best laws become ineffective when a government has a clear intention to break the constitution [1].
The warning highlights a deepening crisis in Poland's judicial system, where the tension between executive power and constitutional safeguards threatens the rule of law.
Safjan, a former president of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal and former judge of the Court of Justice of the European Union, made these comments during a May 2024 appearance on the TVN24 program “Fakty po Faktach” [1, 2]. He said that current government actions aim to undermine the constitution, specifically through controversial reforms of the Constitutional Tribunal [3].
During the discussion, Safjan emphasized that citizens deserve a functional legal system. "Mamy prawo do sądów, a nie do ich atrap," he said, which translates to "We have a right to courts, and not to their mock-ups" [4].
Safjan's perspective is informed by decades of high-level legal service. He served as a judge of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal from 1997 to 2006 [5] and held the position of president of that tribunal from 1998 to 2006 [6]. His international experience includes serving as a judge of the Court of Justice of the European Union from 2009 to 2024 [7].
He further addressed the limitations of legal frameworks when facing political volatility. "Konstytucja nie przewiduje, co zrobić, gdy prezydent chce obalić rząd," he said, noting that the constitution does not provide a solution for when a president intends to overthrow a government [8].
Safjan said that the effectiveness of law depends on the intent of those in power. "Rządy osób, które mają jawną intencję łamania konstytucji, sprawiają, że najlepsze prawo jest nieskuteczne," he said [1].
“We have a right to courts, and not to their mock-ups.”
This critique suggests that Poland's legal impasse cannot be solved through technical legislative adjustments alone. By describing the current judicial state as 'mock courts,' Safjan indicates that the institutional shell of the judiciary remains, but its actual power to constrain the executive has been hollowed out, leaving the country in a precarious state of legal uncertainty.
