The Regional Prosecutor’s Office in Lublin was not aware of a Warsaw court decision ordering the reopening of the investigation into the Polnord case – it learned about it from a journalist at Niezalezna.pl. The court found that the suspension of the proceedings had been premature and that investigative actions should be continued.
“The evidentiary material was the same in relation to Roman Giertych and the same in relation to the other suspects. If the court overturns the suspension and orders actions to be carried out, then the order to carry out further actions would also apply to the Roman Giertych aspect. It can therefore be assumed that the dismissal in Giertych’s case was premature,” assessed prosecutor Jerzy Ziarkiewicz, head of the Regional Prosecutor’s Office in Lublin at the time the Polnord investigation was initiated.
As we reported today, on May 7 the Warsaw Regional Court issued a decision overturning the Regional Prosecutor’s Office in Lublin’s ruling to suspend the investigation into the Polnord case.
According to the court, the suspension was premature, and it pointed out that further investigative actions must be carried out.
How did the Lublin prosecutors react to the Warsaw court’s decision? Surprisingly, they were not yet aware of it.
“This is the first I’ve heard of this situation” – said prosecutor Waldemar Moncarzewski. He admitted, however, that in such a case the investigation would be resumed. “Actions will be undertaken,” he assured.
Prosecutor Jerzy Ziarkiewicz, head of the Regional Prosecutor’s Office in Lublin at the time the Polnord investigation was initiated, learned about the court’s ruling from a publication on Niezalezna.pl. He was not surprised by it. What does it mean?
“The evidentiary material collected in the entire proceedings was divided into two parts – the dismissed case concerning Roman Giertych and the case suspended until May 7. The evidentiary material was the same in relation to Roman Giertych and the same in relation to the other suspects. If the court overturns the suspension and orders actions to be carried out, then the order to carry out further actions would also apply to the Roman Giertych aspect. It can therefore be assumed that the dismissal in Giertych’s case was premature” – emphasized prosecutor Ziarkiewicz.
However, the proceedings cannot be resumed against Giertych:
“A year has passed since the dismissal and reopening the proceedings in this respect is no longer possible” – the prosecutor explains.
Does this mean that the Giertych aspect of the Polnord case will never return to the prosecutor’s office?
“In terms of the charges that Roman Giertych faced in this case – no, because there is a principle of safeguarding the rights of suspects, and the decision to dismiss was not appealed,” Ziarkiewicz explains.
“New circumstances would have to emerge that would justify bringing new charges,” he adds.
He also emphasized that: “if the Giertych case had not been separated and dismissed, but instead the prosecutor had suspended proceedings against all suspects, then the court’s decision would also have applied to Roman Giertych.”
“From the beginning I said that dividing the case was completely unjustified from the point of view of prosecutorial methodology. It shows that you cannot, based on the same evidentiary material, when you are dealing with cooperation between perpetrators, dismiss the case for one and suspend it for the others,” said prosecutor Ziarkiewicz.
“And the court is lifting the suspension and ordering the proceedings to continue, concluding that the evidentiary material is incomplete and needs to be supplemented. The same evidentiary material also applied to the Roman Giertych case. This may create, even for someone unfamiliar with the case, a kind of split perception. I know that different legal assessments of various actions are possible, but that legal assessment is made on the basis of the entirety of the collected evidence after all possible actions have been carried out,” he clarified.