“We have learned that the complainant’s attorney strongly pushed for this verdict. The complainant’s involvement was very significant here, and the court suggested that without it, the case would not have reached court at all – especially since the prosecution was not eager to inform the court,” said today attorney Krzysztof Wąsowski, defense counsel for Adam Borowski, head of the Gazeta Polska Club in Warsaw.
Today, Judge Katarzyna Bień of the District Court for Warsaw-Wola decided that Adam Borowski must serve a sentence of six months of unconditional imprisonment in connection with his statement about Roman Giertych, deputy chairman of Civic Platform (KO).
Borowski’s defense lawyer, attorney Krzysztof Wąsowski, announced that he would file an appeal against today’s court decision.
“The verdict is scandalous. This is a thoughtless approach to adjudication by Judge Katarzyna Bień, who ruled based on Article 75 §2 of the Penal Code. I would like to draw everyone’s attention to the fact that the word ‘may’ appears there. The court does not have to order the execution of the sentence – it may do so. Even if Mr. Adam does not comply with the ruling. The judge did not justify this. She assumed that since it ‘may’, it ‘must’. This is a very strict reading of the provisions, without taking context into account. We have learned that the complainant’s attorney strongly pushed for this verdict. The complainant’s involvement was very significant here, and the court suggested that without it, the case would not have reached court at all – especially since the prosecution was not eager to inform the court,” he said.
Article 75 §2 of the Penal Code
The court may order the execution of a sentence if the convicted person, during the probation period, grossly violates the legal order - in particular if they commit another offense than that specified in §1, or if they evade payment of a fine, supervision, fulfillment of imposed obligations, or execution of penal measures, compensatory measures, or forfeiture.
“We will appeal this. There is also a whole range of legal measures we intend to use. I am much more optimistic than Mr. Adam – this concerns not only the possibility of a presidential pardon, but also other arguments which, according to the court, we raised prematurely, but which can still be used at later stages of the proceedings,” the lawyer added.
He assessed that “the court’s lack of reflection on the discretionary nature of this penalty was somewhat shocking.”
“The court argued that it ‘had to’. The defense claims that there is much broader scope for analysis and justification. We hope that the court of higher instance will be better prepared. After the second instance, the case becomes final,” added attorney Krzysztof Wąsowski.