“There are no ‘neo-judges,’ and the alleged defectiveness of judicial appointments after 2017 has been fabricated from the very beginning,” Supreme Court judge Maria Szczepaniec told Niezalezna.pl. She has decided to run in the elections to the National Council of the Judiciary (KRS). However, she firmly states: “I will not take part in primaries, because the law does not provide for such a procedure. If a scenario contrary to the law is implemented, then the KRS selected in that way will, of course, not be legal.”
On May 12 of this year, the term of office of the judicial members of the National Council of the Judiciary expires — which means a new “group of fifteen” must be elected. The procedure has already been launched, and more judges are submitting their candidacies.
Niezalezna.pl discussed the matter with Judge Stanisław Zdun, Deputy Chair of the KRS, as well as Judge Łukasz Piebiak, president of the association “Lawyers for Poland.”
Supreme Court judge Maria Szczepaniec has also decided to participate in the elections.
“Running for the KRS was not my idea. It was an initiative of citizens who approached me and asked whether I would agree to become a civic candidate in these elections, while also declaring that they would collect signatures of support for me,” she said in an interview with Niezalezna.pl. “I have been a Supreme Court judge for eight years, but I do not think of myself as ‘the judiciary’ as a power. I see being a judge as a service for the good of citizens, and that is why I agreed to take part in these elections, treating the proposal as an honor and recognition of my independence.”
“I would like to sincerely thank everyone who signed the list of support for my candidacy for membership in the KRS,” she added.
Primaries? “I Will Not Take Part”
Minister Waldemar Żurek, together with the Iustitia association, want to conduct “primaries” and present the “group of fifteen” selected in this way to the Speaker of the Sejm, with MPs merely approving their decision. This has sparked opposition among lawyers.
Judge Szczepaniec stated categorically:
“I will not take part in primaries, because the law does not provide for such a procedure. If a scenario contrary to the law is implemented, then the KRS selected in that way will, of course, not be legal.”
“The Constitution of the Republic of Poland does not specify how judges to the KRS are to be selected. The Constitution states that the election of KRS members is regulated by statute. This, incidentally, is at the heart of a lie repeated by some lawyers, who try to convince society that members of the last two KRS terms were selected in violation of the Constitution. It is such a crude deception and violation of the law that, compared to it, so-called ‘creative interpretation of the law’ seems like an innocent reading of legal norms,” the Supreme Court judge explained.
There Are No “Neo-Judges,” There Are Judges
Several months ago, Niezalezna.pl revealed that Waldemar Żurek (still serving as a judge at the time) had filed a criminal complaint, claiming that Judge Szczepaniec — who had adjudicated in one of his cases — impersonated a Supreme Court judge (Article 227 of the Criminal Code concerning the “usurpation of a public function”). Recently, the portal checked the status of the case.
“The investigation is ongoing and has been extended by another six months,” the National Prosecutor’s Office responded at the end of January.
“I have no knowledge of this absurd proceeding. Let me remind you that I testified as a witness,” Judge Szczepaniec said.
Could the mechanism of “we do not recognize X as a judge” be used to remove independent judges?
“I have been saying from the very beginning that there are no ‘neo-judges,’ and that the alleged defectiveness of judicial appointments after 2017 was invented. Yes, in history there have been appointments burdened with defects — and serious ones at that — but these concerned the period before 2017. One can mention, for example, Judge Iwulski, who became a Supreme Court judge without the required seniority. He therefore did not meet the formal requirement set out in the statute to become a Supreme Court judge. I emphasize: a requirement provided by law. Why did that not bother anyone? Additionally, he received his judicial nomination from the Council of State of the Polish People’s Republic, that is, a party organ of the former political system,” the Supreme Court judge recalled.
Disciplinary Cases Involving Judges Facing Problems
Judge Szczepaniec is also running for President of the Supreme Court’s Chamber of Professional Responsibility, although it is not yet known when President Karol Nawrocki will make a decision.
Why, however, are proceedings concerning disciplinary offenses — or even crimes allegedly committed by judges — progressing with significant difficulties? This is critically assessed by public opinion.
“The slowdown in proceedings results from at least two factors. First, impartiality tests have been introduced, which are very often filed by the parties. I myself have dozens of cases blocked by such motions. The second reason is the number of judges adjudicating in the Chamber. The statute provides for 11 judges. Currently, 7 are adjudicating. Unfortunately, we also have a number of old cases that were not examined by judges who refused to adjudicate in this Chamber,” Judge Szczepaniec explained.