Members of the parliamentary PiS (Law and Justice) club addressed the Commissioner for Human Rights (RPO) regarding the changes in the position of the National Prosecutor. The Commissioner inquired with the National Prosecutor and the President of the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court about instances where prosecutorial actions were questioned due to doubts concerning the appointment of the National Prosecutor.
According to the responses from the National Prosecutor and the Supreme Court, “such challenges occur sporadically and do not constitute a systemic phenomenon that would threaten the continuity of the prosecution service’s operations,” reads the RPO’s statement. However, the Commissioner for Human Rights acknowledges that “there is no ruling by a judicial authority that would invalidate either the act removing Dariusz Barski from the position of National Prosecutor or the act appointing Dariusz Korneluk to that position.”
Below is the full text of the response from the Commissioner for Human Rights:
“Chairman of the PiS Parliamentary Club Mariusz Błaszczak and MP Zbigniew Ziobro approached the Commissioner for Human Rights regarding changes to the position of the National Prosecutor.
The Commissioner requested information from the National Prosecutor and the President of the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court regarding the scale of the phenomenon involving challenges to the validity of actions taken by assessors or prosecutors, arising from alleged irregularities in the appointment of the National Prosecutor.
The responses indicate that such challenges to specific actions by assessors or prosecutors occur sporadically and do not represent a widespread or systemic issue that would threaten the continuity of the functioning of the prosecution service.
Regardless, the Commissioner emphasizes that the validity of Dariusz Korneluk’s appointment as National Prosecutor, and the validity of the removal of Dariusz Barski from that position, could only be determined by a court. The Commissioner does not possess legal instruments to independently resolve this matter.
It should be noted that neither an administrative court nor a labor court has so far issued a ruling regarding the removal of Dariusz Barski from the position of National Prosecutor, nor regarding the appointment of Dariusz Korneluk to that office.
Publicly available information also indicates that Dariusz Barski has not attempted to appeal the letter of 12 January 2024, which declared his appointment to the position of National Prosecutor ineffective.
The Commissioner is aware of the Supreme Court resolution dated 27 September 2024, file no. I KZP 3/24. It was issued pursuant to Article 441 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, following a legal question referred to the Supreme Court by an appellate court. Under §3 of that provision, the Supreme Court’s resolution is binding only in the case pending before the court that submitted the legal question. This resolution did not have a universally binding effect, and in particular, it did not invalidate the act appointing Dariusz Korneluk to the office of National Prosecutor.
The Commissioner is also aware of the Constitutional Tribunal judgment of 22 November 2024, file no. SK 13/24. The operative part of the judgment shows that it was an interpretative ruling. This type of ruling by the Constitutional Tribunal does not result in the invalidation of individual legal acts, including acts appointing or removing individuals from public office.
Consequently — although the Commissioner recognizes legal doubts surrounding the procedure that led to changes in the office of the National Prosecutor — there is currently no judicial ruling that would invalidate either the act removing Dariusz Barski from the position of National Prosecutor or the act appointing Dariusz Korneluk to that position.
It must be emphasized that the authority to annul individual acts of public authority lies with the courts, and in this case, no appropriate proceedings have been initiated either before a labor court or an administrative court.
The Commissioner has conveyed the above explanations to the applicants.”