“A recipe for the complete paralysis of the justice system”; “Żurek sends a prosecutorial army to hunt judges”; “Gang-style use of the state apparatus for politics and the fight for power” – these are some of the comments on our portal’s latest findings. We revealed a draft set of guidelines by the Prosecutor General, under which prosecutors will be required – each time – to determine whether the adjudicating panel includes, for example, a so-called “neo-judge”.
As established by Niezalezna.pl – prosecutors will have to – each time – determine whether the adjudicating panel includes a so-called “neo-judge”; not only members of the National Council of the Judiciary will be placed on a “blacklist”, but also judges questioning rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Union or authors of critical statements toward those in power; even informal databases with information about such judges will be created in prosecutor’s offices across the country (regardless of level).
Our editorial team obtained a draft of the Prosecutor General’s guidelines. If they enter into force, the courts will be paralyzed.
“On actions undertaken by prosecutors appearing before common courts and administrative courts in order to ensure the right to an impartial and independent court in cases where it is established that the adjudicating panel designated to hear a case includes or included a judge appointed to office on the basis of a motion by the National Council of the Judiciary formed under the provisions of the Act of 8 December 2017,” – we read in the document.
The guidelines were prepared under the slogan “standardizing prosecutorial practice and guaranteeing the right to an independent, impartial and autonomous court.”
Online reactions: “a recipe for total paralysis in the courts!”
Niezalezna.pl’s findings echoed in the public sphere. Many comments have already appeared on social media.
“Wonderful! Now prosecutors will also deal with prolonging proceedings, because their superior orders them to file motions to exclude judges appointed after 2017. And what if the injured party (auxiliary prosecutor) wants a swift resolution? And what if a person covered by the presumption of innocence is in pre-trial detention?” comments attorney Bartosz Lewandowski.
He adds: “By the way, prosecutors now have an additional task. Most of them already receive case files to ‘staff the dockets’ at the last minute, and now they are also supposed to examine whether a judge was appointed by President Andrzej Duda or not…”
Judge Kamila Borszowska-Moszowska assesses that the Prosecutor General’s guidelines “are not only an attack on judicial independence; an attempt to exert influence and intimidate judges – they are a recipe for the complete paralysis of the justice system.”
The Lawyers for Poland Association also responded to our findings, commenting: “Polish history knows the tragic phenomenon of political authorities creating name-based lists to single out specific individuals for repression. Alongside proscription lists or lists of persons designated for internment – Waldemar Żurek today adds name-based registers of judges faithful to the rule of law.”
“For an independent judge, being placed on Waldemar Żurek’s list is a true honor. Today it is judges – tomorrow any of you may run afoul of a voivode or a political official in a municipality and end up on such a list. The example comes from the top – whoever creates a list of persons selected for political repression not only questions the democratic system but also reveals traits of their personality. Add to this the prosecutor’s involvement in Żurek’s civil and private case – today the National Prosecutor’s Office is a private political army funded by your money,” it was added.
Marcin Romanowski, an MP from Law and Justice (PiS), writes on X: “The prosecution has received new duties from Tusk: to prolong proceedings and help unlawfully undermine the status of judges.”
“Instead of prosecuting criminals, it protects a crypto-dictatorship and the interests of a left-liberal judicial oligarchy colluding with the government. Gang-style use of the state apparatus for politics and the fight for power,” he adds.
Jacek Skała, chairman of the Trade Union of Prosecutors and Employees of the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Poland, notes: “An interesting text regarding guidelines on ‘neo-judges.’ I understand this is a draft. Undoubtedly, the guidelines cannot depenalize the disciplinary offense under Article 137 §1 point 3 of the Law on the Public Prosecutor’s Office, whether we like that provision or not.”
Iwona Tryfon-Wilkoszewska, a member of the Independent Association of Prosecutors Ad Vocem, points out: “Some time ago, when I wrote about this on X – Prosecutor Mariusz Krasoń was greatly outraged, claiming that I was IMAGINING things. The question is: is the prosecutor, as a neo-Regional Prosecutor, being excluded from work on the guidelines, or did he lie outright?”