The National Prosecutor’s Office quickly assumed control over the proceedings concerning a car collision allegedly involving Judge Jakub Iwaniec. The question arises whether it will be able to remain objective, as not long ago Judge Iwaniec issued a ruling that strongly criticized the functioning of the office under the leadership of Dariusz Korneluk. In the justification, the court referred to unlawful actions, while Korneluk himself was described as a “non-National Prosecutor.“ Now, the same office will handle an investigation involving Judge Iwaniec. A chance for revenge?
The collision reportedly occurred on Saturday night in Krasnystaw – a car hit a tree. On Sunday, some media outlets claimed that the driver was Warsaw-based Judge Jakub Iwaniec. His attorney, Michał Skwarzyński, denied this.
Initially, the case was to be handled by the Krasnystaw prosecutor’s office, then by the one in Zamość, until it was ultimately taken over by the Internal Affairs Department of the National Prosecutor’s Office.
Crushing criticism from the judge
Attorney Skwarzyński pointed out the unlawfulness of certain actions, especially the seizure of the judge’s phone, which contains information covered by attorney-client privilege.
It is worth recalling another fact. In August, the portal Niezalezna.pl reported on a ruling issued by Judge Iwaniec, who had analyzed the actions of the prosecution service in an earlier investigation.
“An unusual and constitutionally and procedurally distorted form of prosecutorial conduct, contrary to the principles of the rule of law it is meant to uphold,” – this is how the court assessed the current functioning of the prosecution service, according to Niezalezna.pl. Although the decision referred to a specific case, the court emphasized that the consequences could be disastrous for the operation of the entire prosecution system in Poland. The court also discovered that attempts were made to look for potential leverage. “Such a situation, in the court’s view, is grossly unacceptable from the perspective of the protection of constitutional rights and freedoms,“ the report stated.
Furthermore, Dariusz Korneluk was referred to as a “non-National Prosecutor,” and some of his decisions were described as “unlawful and without legal effect.“
This was not, however, the harshest criticism of the office contained in the justification. The judge indicated that prosecutors “undertook de facto procedural actions within this unit, which constitutes an unusual and constitutionally and procedurally distorted form of prosecutorial conduct, contrary to the principles of the rule of law it is meant to uphold.“
Even then, the judge foresaw that the consequences of such actions would extend far beyond that specific investigation, noting that they would also affect “the field level,“ such as appointments of regional or district prosecutors made by Bilewicz and Korneluk.
He exposed unlawful conduct
The court also pointed to another highly troubling issue. It turned out that during the investigation, the authorities had requested telecommunication data concerning the accused that extended beyond the time frame covered by the charges.
Judge Iwaniec assessed that there had been an unlawful “search for leverage“:
“It is hard to resist the impression that under the guise of one case, the authorities carrying out all these actions, including prosecutors, were attempting to find a foothold and any incriminating evidence against Jarosław W. for the future, relating to his current life and activities.” He then emphasized that “such a situation, in the court’s view, is grossly unacceptable from the perspective of the protection of constitutional rights and freedoms.“
Now, the same office so sharply criticized by Judge Iwaniec is to conduct proceedings concerning Judge Iwaniec himself. Will it be able to maintain professionalism and objectivity?