“It wasn’t an academic seminar. Regardless of the topic, the Polish lawyers’ papers were dominated by political content. I felt like I was taking part in a party congress,” said Judge Dr. Monika Smusz-Kulesza, a board member of the Aequitas association, in an interview with Niezalezna. She took part in a seminar in Wustrau, Germany, where papers on the “rule of law” were presented by, among others, Deputy Minister Dariusz Mazur and the head of Iustitia. “The meeting was meant solely to reinforce the image of a ruined justice system in Poland,” added the lawyer, whose paper was not only taken away but who was even hindered from asking questions.
A German-Polish seminar was held in Wustrau, attended by lawyers from both countries. The main theme: “The issue of the rule of law.”
Poland was represented by a carefully selected group, following a clear pattern, including Deputy Minister of Justice Dariusz Mazur (until recently the leader of Themis), Iustitia chairman Bartłomiej Przymusiński, prosecutor Robert Kmieciak (Lex Super Omnia), and lawyer Piotr Girdwoyń, director of the National School of Judiciary and Public Prosecution (KSSiP), which was also one of the co-organizers. The other was the German Judicial Academy (Deutsche Richterakademie).
“The meeting was an important forum for the exchange of experiences between representatives of the judicial communities of Poland and Germany, focusing on the challenges posed by the current legal and political situation,” claimed the Ministry of Justice, adding that during the seminar Mazur “presented to the guests a comprehensive overview of the reforms aimed at restoring constitutional order and the independence of the judiciary in Poland.” Interestingly, the ministry’s list of speakers also included Dr. Monika Smusz-Kulesza – and that’s an act of sheer audacity.
Withdrawn papers
Dr. Monika Smusz-Kulesza, a judge of the District Court in Łódź, was indeed supposed to deliver a paper in Wustrau, but that never happened. As previously reported by Niezalezna, she had been assigned the topic “The selection of Supreme Court judges in Poland.” The paper was prepared, and Judge Smusz-Kulesza had informed the Polish organizers.
“It was probably then that someone realized the paper was to be delivered by a judge belonging to a group whose views might not appeal to the leaders of the ‘defenders of the rule of law’ and might not fit the narrative imposed on the seminar. So, they decided… to take away her paper. The pretext – ‘program changes,'” the portal reported.
Judge Smusz-Kulesza is a board member of the Aequitas association. She has repeatedly stated that judges who took part in proceedings before the National Council of the Judiciary (KRS) after 2017 have been subjected to harassment.
It turned out that this was not the only incident. Another judge suffered the same fate – she was to present a paper on the influence of judicial associations on the state of the judiciary, another highly sensitive issue. The organizers apparently didn’t want to take the risk and barred her from speaking. The decision, with no explanation, was made shortly before the seminar began.
A one-sided narrative
The withdrawal of papers is no surprise once we know what really happened in Germany. Dr. Smusz-Kulesza has taken part in many academic conferences and debates, but this was unlike anything she had ever seen.
“It wasn’t an academic seminar. No source materials, legal provisions, or rulings were cited or analyzed. Regardless of the topic, the Polish speakers’ papers were full of political content. I felt like I was at a party congress,” she told Niezalezna.pl. The tone was set by the very first paper by Professor Mirosław Wyrzykowski, a former judge of the Constitutional Tribunal. “There was nothing about law, only that the evil PiS and evil ‘neo-judges’ had ruined the state and destroyed the system. Those were literally the kinds of statements being made.“
“Throughout the seminar, the message was absolutely one-sided,” she emphasized. “Whoever spoke from the Polish side repeated the same points – the alleged illegitimacy of the National Council of the Judiciary, the Constitutional Tribunal, and the ‘new’ judges in the Supreme Court and common courts.“
What was the goal of all this?
According to Dr. Smusz-Kulesza, “It was meant to perpetuate the same message that had already been sent abroad. Minister Mazur, in one of his papers, presented the international activities undertaken by the associations Iustitia and Themis, showing how this narrative had been sustained over time. The seminar in Wustrau was simply a continuation of that.“
No discussion allowed
According to the initial plan, each presentation was to be followed by a discussion.
“I suspect that because of my presence, they limited it to short Q&A sessions. Of course, I tried to ask questions, but it wasn’t easy since I was the only one who could disrupt the narrative being crafted. I was interrupted, ignored, or not given the floor at all. After Dariusz Mazur’s presentation, the atmosphere became openly hostile; one of the participants even used offensive language, and finally, my microphone was cut off,” she recounted.
“Only thanks to Thomas Guddat, the president of the Polish-German association who chaired the meeting, was I able to ask any questions at all.“
Surprised Germans
What happened during the official sessions was one thing, but the informal conversations were just as telling. Dr. Smusz-Kulesza spoke with German lawyers and came away with a clear impression:
“They have no idea about the real situation in Poland. They know it only from one-sided reports that have become deeply ingrained. When they heard the other side’s perspective, they didn’t even understand what it was about.“
That is hardly surprising, given that the seminar in Wustrau was organized by an association whose Polish members are exclusively Iustitia activists.
At one point, a visibly embarrassed German lawyer approached Dr. Smusz-Kulesza. “I told him that the narrative here was completely one-sided and that I was trying to show the other side’s position. He listened carefully and seemed genuinely surprised, as if he was hearing it for the first time. That’s why I believe that Germans – and, unfortunately, the broader international audience – have been so thoroughly fed one narrative that many of them, perhaps not all, but a large number, have no idea what the reality actually is,” she explained.
She believes that previous events of this kind were identical in nature.
“If only representatives of Iustitia or Themis have taken part in these conferences, how could German, French, or other foreign lawyers know the true facts? It was a huge mistake to neglect this for so many years,” the judge emphasized.
The German approach to law
German participants also gave presentations, some jointly with Polish lawyers. What did they say?
“The contrast was striking. They really focused on the law. When the topic was judicial independence, the German professors and judges presented thorough, substantive papers. Absolutely nothing political,” Judge Smusz-Kulesza recounted. That’s why she listened to the Polish participants’ speeches with distaste – their tone sounded even more extreme in comparison.
“It was constant vilification of their own country – how terrible things had been, how the judiciary had been devastated. They didn’t stop at 2023, because Minister Mazur claimed that they wanted to ‘fix things,’ but since Karol Nawrocki became president, they haven’t been able to carry out reforms and that ‘bad judges’ still sit in the courts.“
To be clear, the Germans didn’t seem bothered by any of this. The atmosphere was telling on Sunday evening, when all the guests arrived and were briefly introduced.
“Right away, I saw the Germans’ attitude. Most of them said that Poland now finally has a chance to rebuild the rule of law and that they were glad we could exchange experiences. That clearly shows what they know and what they think about Poland,” said Smusz-Kulesza.
The martyr Żurek
Of course, there was also talk of the “heroic” struggle for the rule of law waged by former judge and now minister Waldemar Żurek, along with claims that most of the judiciary supports his actions.
“After one of the presentations, when they criticized what PiS had done – including replacing dozens of court presidents – I said I wanted to respond to each point, because exactly the same thing has been done now. Dozens of court presidents have been replaced again. The answer was: ‘They were improperly appointed.’ That’s the universal excuse for everything,” she pointed out.
What is the purpose of such meetings?
If German lawyers don’t understand the nuances, and the same Polish participants keep repeating the same claims to themselves, what is the point?
“It makes absolutely no sense. The meeting was only meant to reinforce the image of a devastated justice system in Poland. There was no real debate, no exchange of ideas or solutions with the Germans,” concluded Dr. Monika Smusz-Kulesza.