Judge Justyna Koska-Janusz, presiding over the panel in the case of Fr. Michał Olszewski and officials of the Ministry of Justice, rejected the defense motion to allow a social organization to join the proceedings. She cited the prosecutor’s objection. She also refused to allow the defense to submit all formal motions. “The court may never limit a party’s right to file formal motions!” protested Fr. Olszewski’s defense counsel, attorney Michał Skwarzyński.
The second day of the trial of Fr. Michał Olszewski and officials of the Ministry of Justice began with the submission of formal motions. One concerned allowing the social organization Association of Judges of the Republic of Poland to participate in the case. The motion was signed by Judge Adam Jaworski, and the representative was to be, among others, Judge Piotr Schab, the lawful Disciplinary Ombudsman for Judges of the Common Courts.
Multiplying obstacles?
Judge Justyna Koska-Janusz approached the motion skeptically, although it was unanimously supported by the defense. The reason was said to be a formal deficiency, namely the failure to attach the statute of the Association of Judges of the Republic of Poland. The judge referred to Article 90 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which requires the submission of a paper version of the document.
One of the defense attorneys, Oskar Hyńko, stated that his trainee was present in the courtroom. He asked her to bring the statute, the absence of which had become the subject of the dispute and of Judge Koska-Janusz’s consultation with the lay judges. The document reached the presiding judge even before the consultation ended. The prosecutors agreed with the court’s doubts. Prosecutor Woźniak strongly objected to the defense motion and requested its dismissal. “The person representing this organization is simultaneously a defense counsel in the case,” Prosecutor Woźniak argued.
The problem is that this is not true, as explained by the applicant, attorney Skwarzyński. “I am the organization’s representative. A statutory body or an authorized member of the management board of a social organization, in line with common practice, appoints a representative of the social organization, who does not have to be a member of that association. Due to a very important matter taking place today at the Supreme Court, none of the members of the Association of Judges of the Republic of Poland could appear at today’s hearing. That is why I was asked to submit their motion to allow the social organization to participate in the proceedings,” Skwarzyński explained.
The judge does not want a judge to participate
After deliberation, Judge Koska-Janusz decided not to allow the Association of Judges of the Republic of Poland to participate in the hearing. “If even one of the parties does not consent to such an organization joining the proceedings, the court refuses or excludes such an organization from participation. Moreover, it should be noted that, as follows from the content of the written notification submitted by this organization today at the hearing, there are no grounds to recognize that the statutory objectives of this association are related to the case at hand, particularly in a situation where the defendants face charges of participation in a criminal organization and the alleged acts concern fiscal offenses. This decision is not subject to appeal,” Judge Koska-Janusz announced, after which she refused to grant the defense the floor.
Another decision by the presiding judge was the rejection of the defense motions to discontinue the proceedings due to the lack of a complaint by an authorized prosecutor, as well as the motion to discontinue due to the factual lack of grounds for the indictment.
After announcing this decision, Judge Koska-Janusz decided that the time for the defense to submit formal motions had ended. This triggered strong protests from those concerned. “The court, apart from a media show, clearly does not want to examine the correctness of this trial from a formal perspective. (…) The court may never limit a party’s right to file formal motions. (…) The court wants to start the trial at all costs and is not interested in the motions of one of the parties,” protested attorney Skwarzyński.