Commissioner for Human Rights

CHR extraordinary complaint. Supreme Court judge asks for composition in line with Court of Justice of the EU and European Court of Human Rights rulings or to refer case to a chamber other than the Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs Chamber

Date:

According to correspondence from the Supreme Court to the Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights (CHR) dated October 16, 2024, Judge Grzegorz Żmij, assigned to hear the case involving the CHR's extraordinary complaint regarding two inheritance orders concerning the same individual (file number II NSNc 97/24), decided to submit the case file to the President of the Supreme Court responsible for the Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs Chamber. This submission was made with the aim of either assigning the case to a composition of the Supreme Court that complies with the criteria established in the CJEU judgment of December 21, 2023 (C-718), and the ECHR judgment of November 23, 2023 (Walesa v. Poland), or transferring the case to another chamber of the Supreme Court.

In a decision dated December 21, 2023, the CJEU (Grand Chamber) ruled that the questions submitted by the Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs Chamber were inadmissible. The Court ruled that the questions presented by the Chamber did not come from a body with the status of an independent and impartial court previously established by law.

The second ruling cited is the ECHR's November 23, 2023 pilot judgment in the case of Walesa v. Poland (application 50849/21). The Court ruled that the Chamber for Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs, which heard the extraordinary complaint in the applicant's case, was not “an independent and impartial court established by law,” and pointed out flaws in the extraordinary complaint procedure.

Already earlier, judges of the Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs Chamber had suspended proceedings in cases involving extraordinary complaints of the CHR "due to the need to implement legislative changes to address procedural deficiencies identified in the judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights".