Today's ultimate Court Communication informs that, in the wake of the influx of nearly 50,000 electoral protests, corresponding to the 2–3-year average influence of cases to this institution, all available administrative forces were seconded to registry cases and deliver copies of protests to participants in the proceedings.
The ultimate Court pointed out that the precedence was to guarantee the smooth conduct of proceedings in accordance with the terms of the Electoral Code and that contact with the offices and secretariats of the Chambers could be hampered in the coming days. At the same time, it was ensured that work was underway to get back to standard operating mode as shortly as possible.
First of all, the activities relating to the registration of cases and the transportation of copies of electoral protests to participants of proceedings are carried out in order to guarantee that the case is dealt with correctly and that the cases are dealt with within the time limits resulting from the electoral code. another responsibilities were besides seconded to these activities on a regular basis. Therefore, in the coming days, contact with the offices and secretariats of the ultimate Court Chambers may be hampered. We are counting on your knowing of the situation and the difficulties resulting therefrom. All efforts are being made to get the ultimate Court back to average functioning as shortly as possible – reads the Communication
Meanwhile, Roman Gierty, known for his active commitment to the drafting of electoral protests, one more time raised the request to recalculate all the votes cast in the 2025 presidential election. His argument – based on the alleged necessity to verify the correctness of the calculation of results in each of the about 27 000 regional electoral commissions – is nevertheless met with criticism of electoral law experts who unanimously indicate that Polish government does not supply for specified a procedure.
The electoral code clearly governs the function of the electoral protest and the powers of the ultimate Court: Article 425 of the Act of 5 January 2011 states that the ultimate Court recognizes protests concerning violations of electoral law only to the degree indicated by the protesting party, and only in respect of individual circuits or municipalities. The law does not let a national recalculation order for all cards; At most, the court may revoke the results in a circumstantial peripheral commission and mention the case to the committee for reconsideration. There is so no basic provision which would authorise any instance to automatically, universally convert votes.
Giertych's proposal that the ultimate Court call on all the peripheral commissions to recalculate the votes is in clear contradiction with the logic of electoral law, as well as the explanation of doctrine and case law. 2 years ago, the ultimate Court explained in a akin case that only protests submitted within 24 hours of the announcement of the results could lead to a recalculation order, and only in circuits where doubts about the regularity of the procedure were found. The broad influx of protests does not alter the scope of the Court of First Instance's powers; the only thing that the Court of First Instance can do is, in accordance with the Electoral Code, registry cases, service write-offs and deal with any action within the limits of the powers conferred by the legislature.
The postulates of recalculation across the country so seem to have the character of a political manifestation which does not translate into real legal possibilities. The absurdity of this action is besides revealed in applicable terms – the costs and time needed to execute specified a global conversion in respective tens of thousands of polling venues cannot be reconciled with the statutory deadlines of the ultimate Court's judgement (until 2 July 2025). Even in the event of a uncovering of deficiencies in single circuits, the protocols and documentation have already been secured by the State Election Commission and kept in accordance with the rules, effectively preventing them from being ‘repeated’ on a large scale.
The ultimate Court communication leaves no uncertainty – administrative resources are active in the process of registering and handling protests, and the legal way is to verify only the identified cases, alternatively than the universal recalculation of all votes. In this situation calls for a global re-vote closer to political happening than to a real procedure adopted in a democratic state of law.
