A Groundbreaking Court Decision on Poland’s “Suspension” of the Right to Seek Asylum

In January 2026, a Polish court issued a significant ruling challenging the legal framework used to suspend access to asylum procedures at Poland’s border with Belarus.

In a case supported by ELIL’s Polish team, the Regional Court in Olsztyn ruled against the government regulation that allows authorities to refuse asylum applications under Poland’s “suspension” law, in effect since March 2025.

Although the decision concerns an individual case, it represents an important step in defending the fundamental right to seek asylum in Poland at a time when this right is increasingly under threat. This decision sends an important signal for the protection of the fundamental right to seek international protection in Poland.

What was the case about?

The case concerned an asylum seeker who applied for protection while hospitalised in Hajnówka, near the Polish-Belarusian border. His application was rejected by the Border Guard, based on a government regulation that temporarily restricted the right to apply for asylum in that border area.

At the same time, the District Court in Kętrzyn ordered the extension of the asylum seeker’s placement in a closed detention facility. His legal representative appealed this decision to the Regional Court in Olsztyn.

The Regional Court overturned the detention order, finding that it had been imposed improperly. In doing so, the Court examined the legal basis used to deny the asylum application and found the government regulation relied on by the authorities to be inadmissible.

Why is this decision so important?

The government regulation in question was adopted under a law introduced in February 2025, which allows Poland to temporarily limit access to asylum procedures in situations described as the “instrumentalisation” of migration, a term used to refer to migration movements allegedly encouraged by third countries as part of so-called “hybrid warfare”.

While the Court acknowledged the difficult political and security context at Poland’s eastern border, it made clear that security concerns cannot justify a blanket suspension of fundamental rights.

The Court found that the regulation violated:

• International law, including the principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits returning people to places where they risk serious human rights violations;

• European Union law, including the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights;

• And crucially, the Polish Constitution itself.

The Polish Constitution explicitly protects the right to apply for international protection. Any restriction of this right must be introduced by an act of parliament, not by a government regulation. The law and its regulation gave the Council of Ministers broad powers without clear limits or proper judicial review, which undermined basic protections guaranteed by the Constitution.

These concerns have also been raised by Poland’s Commissioner for Human Rights, who warned that such regulations cannot be properly reviewed by the courts and give too much power to the government.

The outcome

The Regional Court in Olsztyn found that the regulation suspending the right to apply for asylum was unconstitutional as applied in this case, in particular because it was used outside its territorial scope.

The Court explained that the person should have been treated as someone seeking asylum in Poland, even though the Border Guard had not formally registered his application. Because of this, the authorities used the wrong legal rules when ordering his detention, treating him as someone in a return procedure instead of an asylum procedure.

For this reason, the Court overturned the detention order. The ruling did not change the Border Guard’s refusal to register the asylum application, as the court dealing with detention does not have the power to do so.

Why this matters beyond one case

Although the ruling formally applies only to the individual case before the Court, it is a powerful and encouraging development. At a time when access to asylum in Poland is increasingly restricted, this decision reaffirms that fundamental rights cannot be suspended by a government order.

In the absence of a clear assessment by the European Commission of the compatibility of Poland’s “suspension” law with EU law, this judgment helps shed light on the serious human rights concerns raised by the ongoing practice of denying access to asylum at the Polish-Belarusian border.