Constitutional complaint and extraordinary complaint are two institutions functioning in the Polish legal system whose task is to protect freedoms and human rights set out in the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. The constitutional complaint is regulated by the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, while the extraordinary complaint is a statutory instrument. These institutions were introduced
to the Polish legal system for different reasons. Their functions are also other. The author does a comparative
analysis of a constitutional complaint and an extraordinary complaint in such a scope that it will be possible to answer the question about mutual relations between a constitutional complaint and an extraordinary complaint and their significance in protecting human rights. In particular, it is worth considering to what extent the deficits resulting from the narrow model of constitutional complaint adopted in Poland have been filled by the extraordinary complaint. Undoubtedly, these are two
significantly different institutions. The considerations are based on the analysis of the texts of normative acts of the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Tribunal and the Supreme Court and concerning the doctrine’s statements. In the conclusion of the conducted analysis, the author points out that although the extraordinary complaint is not an answer to all the imperfections of the constitutional complaint, it is an institution that has potential. Its effectiveness in protecting human rights depends on how it is be shaped in legal regulations and to what extent the Supreme Court is willing to deviate from the constitutional
value of stability of final court judgements.