The District Court in Warsaw has ruled that “none of the circumstances preventing the reissuance of a European Arrest Warrant (EAW)” against Law and Justice (PiS) MP Marcin Romanowski were present. The decision was made after the judge who had previously revoked the warrant was removed from the case. “There are no new facts or circumstances, but after the unlawful removal of Judge Łubowski, there is a new judge and a new ruling,” wrote Zbigniew Bogucki.
The previous EAW was revoked on December 19, 2025, by Judge Dariusz Łubowski. After a subsequent motion was filed, the prosecution requested his removal from the case. In mid-January 2026, that request was granted, and the case was reassigned to Judge Izabela Ledzion.
In her reasoning, Judge Ledzion stated that the earlier issuance and revocation of the EAW “does not eliminate the possibility of submitting another motion for the application of an EAW,” since the condition for issuing it is the suspicion that the person sought is residing in the territory of another European Union Member State. She emphasized that the EAW “is, by its very nature, a specific type of arrest warrant effective within the EU” and does not constitute an independent basis for deprivation of liberty, the decision in that regard is taken by the court of the state executing the warrant, in this case, Hungary.
The court noted that issuing an EAW is inadmissible if the person is in Poland, outside the European Union, or if the alleged offense is punishable by a non-custodial penalty. In the court’s assessment, none of these conditions applies in Romanowski’s case. In December 2024, the MP announced that he had been granted asylum in Hungary.
Politicians and legal representatives commented on the decision. MP Zbigniew Bogucki wrote: “There are no new facts or circumstances, but after the unlawful removal of Judge Łubowski, there is a new judge and a new ruling, now favorable to those in power. This is not the rule of law; this is open lawlessness.”
Nowych dowodów i okoliczności nie ma, ale po bezprawnym odsunięciu sędziego Łubowskiego jest nowy sędzia i jest nowe orzeczenie – teraz już korzystne dla władzy.
— Zbigniew Bogucki🇵🇱 (@BoguckiZbigniew) February 18, 2026
To nie jest praworządność, to jawne bezprawie. https://t.co/HYVHmICkOV
The MP’s defense counsel, attorney Bartosz Lewandowski, had previously stated that “the EAW was issued even though the matter had already been finally concluded by the revocation of the EAW, and no new circumstances or documents have emerged in the case.” He also filed a motion to discontinue the EAW proceedings, citing the earlier revocation of the warrant under the same factual circumstances. That motion was not granted.
❗️ENA za @RomanowskiPL został wydany pomimo tego, że wcześniej sprawa została już prawomocnie zakończona uchyleniem ENA i żadne nowe okoliczności i dokumenty w sprawie się nie pojawiły.
— Bartosz Lewandowski (@BartoszLewand20) February 18, 2026
To rażące naruszenie przepisów procedury karnej oraz Konstytucji 🇵🇱
Postanowienie zapadło… https://t.co/uCC2mEmLib pic.twitter.com/oxUMq1te2L
Attorney Adam Gomoła also addressed the matter, recalling the wording of Article 248 § 3 of the Code of Criminal Procedure: “The re-arrest of a suspect based on the same facts and evidence is INADMISSIBLE.”
Przy okazji przypomnę naczelną, gwarancyjną zasadę procesu karnego zawartą w art. 248 par. 3 kodeksu postępowania karnego:
— Adam Gomoła (@antylis) February 18, 2026
"Ponowne zatrzymanie osoby podejrzanej na podstawie tych samych faktów i dowodów jest NIEDOPUSZCZALNE".
A minori ad maius ! https://t.co/7LETzYssFg