The commentary contains a criticism of the judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court, in which the problem of the constitutionality of limitations on the openness of administrative court proceedings in proceedings before the Provincial Administrative Court has been reduced to linking the statutory limitation with the constitutional value enabling such a limitation. The Supreme Administrative Court did not conduct a proportionality test. Carrying it out and taking into account the normative and factual context, would imply a statement that the restrictions at the time of issuing the challenged judgement of the Provincial Administrative Court were not even useful for a specific purpose. They also did not meet the criteria of necessity and proportionality in the strict sense.

The commentary contains a criticism of the judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court, in which the problem of the constitutionality of limitations on the openness of administrative court proceedings in proceedings before the Provincial Administrative Court has been reduced to linking the statutory limitation with the constitutional value enabling such a limitation. The Supreme Administrative Court did not conduct a proportionality test. Carrying it out and taking into account the normative and factual context, would imply a statement that the restrictions at the time of issuing the challenged judgement of the Provincial Administrative Court were not even useful for a specific purpose. They also did not meet the criteria of necessity and proportionality in the strict sense.