Because of an “improperly constituted court” – that is, the presence on the bench of a judge appointed after 2018 – it was decided to leave at liberty a pedophile who had raped his six-year-old granddaughter. Among those behind the Supreme Court’s cassation ruling in this case was Waldemar Płóciennik, a judge who in 1982 sentenced an activist of the anti-communist opposition. “We are 34 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and within the most important institutions of the justice system we still have people about whom we say that they handed down sentences during martial law for ‘defaming the USSR,’” said Michał Rachoń on the program Rewolwer.
The beneficiaries of the chaos in the Ministry of Justice and the justice system being served up by the current governing coalition and its acolytes are ordinary criminals.
“Criminals benefit from ‘neo-judges,’ from the annulment of judgments, from decisions about ‘improper judicial panels,’” said Katarzyna Gójska, editor-in-chief of Nowe Państwo, on TV Republika.
A pedophile at liberty and politics in the courts
Just before Christmas, the portal Niezalezna.pl described a shocking story. A degenerate who for a year raped his six-year-old granddaughter will not go behind bars, because politics has prevailed in the courts.
Although the Regional Court in Rzeszów sentenced him in 2022 to three and a half years in prison, and the Court of Appeal increased the sentence to five years, the pedophile will not be incarcerated. His defense counsel filed a cassation appeal with the Supreme Court, which in January 2025 decided to stay execution of the sentence, and in November 2025 referred the case for retrial. Why? Because of an “improperly constituted court.” As established by Niezalezna.pl, the justification of the Supreme Court’s ruling did not address the child’s ordeal at all. The judges focused exclusively on politics – the National Council of the Judiciary, judges’ career paths, and the dates of their appointments. Meanwhile, the child’s rapist remains at liberty.
Płóciennik – from communism to the Third Republic
The Supreme Court’s ruling was issued by three judges: Zbigniew Puszkarski, Kazimierz Klugiewicz, and Waldemar Płóciennik.
Judge Płóciennik deserves particular attention here. A former member of the Polish United Workers’ Party (PZPR), he handed down sentences during martial law against activists of the anti-communist opposition.
“We are 34 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and within the most important institutions of the justice system we still have people about whom we say that they handed down sentences during martial law for ‘defaming the USSR.’ We are returning to square one – ‘what we have to deal with as a result of their mistakes are their best ideas.’ What is happening is precisely what was apparently meant to happen,” said Michał Rachoń, program director of TV Republika, on Rewolwer. “Releasing criminals from prisons while an attack on the state is underway is nothing new,” he added.
As a judge of the District Court in Koszalin, in September 1982 Płóciennik sentenced Zofia Pietkiewicz for her participation in an anti-communist demonstration a few days earlier.
Archival photographs show Ms. Pietkiewicz, today remembered as an “indomitable woman from Koszalin”, running in a white outfit toward a tear-gas canister fired by the riot police (ZOMO). She manages to throw the canister away. The case went before Judge Waldemar Płóciennik, who found her guilty of the alleged act, namely that during the demonstration she “insulted, during and in connection with the performance of official duties, the intervening officers of the Civic Militia (MO) (…), hurling at them words commonly regarded as offensive.” For this, Płóciennik sentenced her to eight months of unconditional imprisonment. He stated that she had been identified because “by virtue of her gray hair and light clothing she must have been a fairly distinctive person.”
“Such a man is shaping the Polish justice system today. It is astonishing. The presence of this man in the Polish Supreme Court is an insult to the independent Republic of Poland,” commented Katarzyna Gójska.
In November 2025, Judge Waldemar Płóciennik sat on the Criminal Chamber panel of the Supreme Court that challenged a decision of the Supreme Court’s Chamber of Professional Responsibility. The reason was the “composition of the court.” “It results in the fact that we are not dealing with the Supreme Court as an impartial and independent body,” Płóciennik argued. He cited the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, as well as a 2020 resolution of three chambers of the Supreme Court, according to which “an improperly constituted court exists when the panel includes a person selected as a judge by the National Council of the Judiciary in the composition established in 2018.”