the essence of freedoms and rights. However, the Act of 22 November 2013 only mentions the rights of patients. A key document which defines the principles of the facility operation, including patients’ rights and obligations, is a document titled „Internal Rules and Regulations of Patient’s Stay in NCPDB”, which was issued pursuant to Article 23 of Healthcare Operations Act of 15 April 2011109. According to this provision matters concerning methods and terms for rendering healthcare services by a healthcare facility which have not been regulated statutorily or by the facility’s constitution are defined by rules and regulations developed by a facility manager. One has to underline that the very Act of 22 November 2013 does not include a provision which authorizes the facility director to issue internal rules and regulations. This is a clear legislative gap. Thus, one has to assume that according to current legislation, the facility manager is competent only to define the method and terms of rendering healthcare services, i.e. therapies to be delivered to patients staying at the facility. The above mentioned provision does not authorise NCPDB manager to define i.a. sanctions to discipline patients, methods of surveillance or rules for participation in religious practices, and in the Internal Rules and Regulations concerned such issues have indeed been defined. This is a particularly flagrant violation, as the sources of commonly applicable law have been clearly defined by the legislator in the Constitution to include: the Constitution, statutes, ratified international agreements and regulations, local acts of law as well as regulations equivalent to statutes which are issued by the President during martial law. An unequivocal statement in this case was voiced by the Constitutional Tribunal which pointed out that the legal situation of citizens (…) may be regulated only by means of commonly applicable acts of law110. Thus, there cannot be any doubts that detailed regulation of NCPDB patients’ rights and obligations in the Internal Rules and Regulations of the facility violates Article 7 of the Constitution, which says that the organs of public authority shall function on the basis of, and within the limits of, the law. In this context one has to note that the CHR commissioned an eminent expert in the constitutional law, dr hab. Ryszard Piotrowski from the Warsaw University to prepare an opinion whether the Internal Rules and Regulations of Patient’s stay at NCPDB in Gostynin conform with the Polish Constitution. In his opinion delivered on 14 March 2019, Mr. Piotrowski unequivocally stated that due to lack of the basis – required by the Constitution – for establishing the Rules and Regulations, the entire document does not conform with Article 7 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. A big problem is also that the Rules and Regulations are subject to frequent modifications, as a result of which new amendments are made which provide a different regulation of a given issue and new rules of the facility operation. During the visit, Rules and Regulation dated 4 January were valid, but they were modified twice on 8 April 2019, the amendments being introduced within a weekly interval. This surely demonstrates that there is incoherence between the concept of NCPDB operation and the provisions of the Act and its implementing regulations concerning NCPDB. Its patients 109 110 48 Consolidated text: Journal of Laws (Dz. U.) of 2020, item 295. Judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal of 9 November 1999, case no K. 28/98. PART IV – Situation in places of detention