Once again, President Nawrocki is under attack – this time over pardons. “The first three pardons concerned ordinary Poles, non-media cases,” explained the Head of the President’s Cabinet, Paweł Szefernaker. He described the situation of these individuals and the reasons why the right of pardon was applied to them.
The first pardons issued by President Karol Nawrocki stirred strong emotions. The Chancellery of the President of the Republic of Poland (KPRP) informed that the head of state reviewed eight applications for pardon. Five were rejected, and in three cases President Nawrocki decided to exercise his constitutional prerogative. As customary, the identities of those pardoned were not disclosed. A public debate erupted in the media. The Head of the President’s Cabinet, Paweł Szefernaker, decided to dispel speculation.
“The first three pardons concerned ordinary Poles, non-media cases,” he emphasized.
The minister also described the current situation of the three pardoned individuals. Based on this description, they can be matched with the cases listed in official communications from the Chancellery, which specified the legal provisions under which they had been convicted by the courts.
Humanitarian reasons were decisive
The first person pardoned had been convicted of fraud, causing significant damage in economic transactions, and harming creditors. President Nawrocki took into account the difficult family situation due to a serious illness of a close family member, as well as the necessity of caring for that person and for minors. He also considered a positive community interview, the significant passage of time since the offenses were committed, compliance with the law after sentencing, and the inability to benefit from protective measures предусмотрed by the Executive Criminal Code. Szefernaker revealed that this was “a husband and father caring for his wife undergoing oncological treatment for an exceptionally aggressive cancer,” adding that his imprisonment would devastate the family.
The second case concerned a person convicted of making criminal threats. As stated in the justification, the president took into account the very difficult health condition and advanced age of the convicted person, the long time elapsed since the offense, and compliance with the law after sentencing.
The minister said this was “an over 85-year-old, ailing widow,” adding that she sold her apartment to repay her obligations and make amends for her guilt. “Due to her very poor health, advanced age, remorse, and good opinions, the pardon was granted for humanitarian reasons,” he added.
The third person had been convicted of unintentionally causing a catastrophe in land traffic, resulting in the death of a person or serious injury to many. The decision to grant a pardon was influenced by “the very difficult health condition of the convicted person, advanced age, expression of remorse, apology to the victims, the incidental nature of the act, and a positive community opinion.”
“This is a person after a traffic accident with severe bodily harm and serious oncological problems. For years outside any conflict with the law. Today, he is unable to serve a sentence. The pardon was also granted for humanitarian reasons,” Szefernaker emphasized.
These are ordinary Poles in dramatic situations. In all three cases, there were positive court opinions and exceptionally difficult health or family circumstances. Each decision was also supported by the Prosecutor General. “The state cannot be weak toward the strong and strong toward the weak. It must be just. And that is precisely why Poles elected President Karol Nawrocki,” the presidential minister concluded.