The National Council of the Judiciary (KRS) has adopted a resolution stating that Justice Minister Adam Bodnar’s dismissal of Judge Przemysław Radzik from his position as Deputy Disciplinary Officer for Common Court Judges was “unlawful and ineffective.” The KRS argued that this decision constitutes a constitutional violation.
On April 4, Justice Minister Adam Bodnar removed Judge Przemysław Radzik of the Warsaw Court of Appeal from his role as Deputy Disciplinary Officer.
In its own statement, the Ministry of Justice admitted that, under current regulations, the minister had no legal authority to dismiss Judge Radzik.
“The most ridiculous accusation against me is that I lost the attribute of independence of character. They claimed I did not provide a guarantee of proper professional conduct. This is like the PRL [Communist-era Poland]! Just like judges were fired during martial law with the same justification—that they did not provide a guarantee of proper performance of duties in the Polish People’s Republic,” Judge Radzik told niezalezna.pl.
KRS: Decision Is Ineffective and Unlawful
On Friday, the KRS issued its position regarding the justice minister’s decision.
“The National Council of the Judiciary, in accordance with Article 186(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, safeguarding the independence of courts and judges, declares that the Justice Minister’s decision of April 4, 2025, to dismiss Judge Przemysław Radzik from the position of Deputy Disciplinary Officer for Common Court Judges is an unlawful and ineffective act. Judge Przemysław Radzik remains obligated to perform the duties and powers of the Deputy Disciplinary Officer,” the resolution states.
The KRS emphasized that no legal provisions grant the justice minister or any other state body the authority to dismiss the Deputy Disciplinary Officer before the end of their term.
The Council added that this was “a deliberate legislative measure to protect the judiciary from unjustified, arbitrary influence by the executive branch.”
“The Justice Minister, as a public authority, under Article 7 of the Constitution, is only permitted to act on the basis of and within the limits of the law. The Justice Minister is not authorized to expand his powers through analogy. The Justice Minister’s action directly violates Article 7 of the Constitution and, as such, is legally ineffective,” the statement reads.
The KRS also reminded that the Constitutional Tribunal had already obligated the justice minister to “refrain from actions preventing the exercise of the rights, duties, and powers” of the Disciplinary Officer and their Deputies.
“The Justice Minister’s decision constitutes a direct violation of Article 190(1) of the Constitution,” the Council concluded.