Repression of Polish judges and prosecutors – report by KOS

Share

Everything you need to know about the rule of law in Poland

More

The Justice Defence Committee (KOS) published a report entitled “A country that punishes. Pressure and repression of Polish judges and prosecutors”. The main objective of the report is to present how new disciplinary mechanisms in the judiciary and public prosecution service are being used as tools of political pressure and intimidation.



KOS is a collaborative effort of 12 organisations associating judges and prosecutors, as well as non-governmental organisations and social initiatives involved in the defence of the rule of law in Poland. The committee was established to work together when the impartiality of judges and the independence of lawyers are under threat.

 

The report begins with a summary of the main activities of KOS since being established on 4 June 2018. In the main body of the report you can find information about:

 

  • Changes to the law governing disciplinary proceedings implemented by the ruling Law and Justice party – the system of disciplinary responsibility of judges has been subjected to the almost unlimited control of the Minister of Justice, who simultaneously holds the office of Prosecutor General.
  • Examples of the use of the disciplinary proceedings against judges who publicly express critical opinions about changes in the justice system and oppose violations of the Polish constitution by the ruling party’s politicians and its nominees.
  • Other examples of pressure on judges involving deprival of the opportunity for promotion, excessive burdening of judges with cases, use of criminal proceedings against judges, deliberate organizational changes in courts to deprive judges of their functions, transfer to another division of the court against the judge’s desires, and many more.
  • “Soft” repressions including unjustified and manipulative attacks by some politicians and journalists or special campaigns to discredit the judiciary sponsored by state-owned companies.
  • Changes in the public prosecution service implemented by Law and Justice in 2016 which led to the far-reaching politicization of this institution, increase of control over prosecutors by the Minister of Justice who is also the Prosecutor General, and personnel changes to guarantee a high degree of loyalty among prosecutors to the ruling party’s political goals.
  • Examples of political pressure exercised against prosecutors includes harassment of selected prosecutors, such as members of the Lex Super Omnia Association of Prosecutors, disciplinary procedures initiated against prosecutors criticizing changes in the judiciary and prosecution service under the Law and Justice government, and many other cases of unjustified repression.

 

The full report, titled “A country that punishes. Pressure and repression of Polish judges and prosecutors”, can be found here.

 

By Marek Tatala



Author


Everything you need to know about the rule of law in Poland


More

Published

March 5, 2019

Tags

Supreme Courtrule of lawdisciplinary proceedingsEuropean CommissionDisciplinary ChamberNational Council of the Judiciaryjudicial independenceCourt of JusticeConstitutional TribunaljudgesAndrzej DudaPolandEuropean UniondemocracyZbigniew Ziobropresidential electionsjudiciaryFirst President of the Supreme Courtpreliminary rulingsCJEUMinister of Justiceelections 2020Court of Justice of the EUIgor TuleyaCOVID-19PresidentProsecutor GeneralprosecutorsLaw and Justicemuzzle lawJarosław Kaczyńskiacting first president of the Supreme CourtMay 10 2020 elections2017Freedom HouseExtraordinary Control and Public Affairs ChamberVenice CommissionConstitutionNCJdisciplinary systemelectionsNational Electoral CommissionCommissioner for Human RightsKamil ZaradkiewiczGeneral Assembly of the Supreme Court JudgesAleksander StepkowskiMałgorzata Manowskademocratic backslidingdecommunizationfreedom of assemblyJulia PrzyłębskaLaw on the NCJrecommendationAdam BodnarHuman Rights CommissionerCCBEThe Council of Bars and Law Societies of EuropereportZiobroPM Mateusz Morawieckifreedom of expressionprosecutionEuropean Association of Judges11 January March in WarsawHungarycriminal lawNational ProsecutorcoronavirusC-791/19disciplinary liability for judgesWojciech Hermelińskiresolution of 23 January 2020Stanisław PiotrowiczPiotr PszczółkowskiJarosław WyrembakLeon KieresAndrzej ZollPKWMarek SafjanMałgorzata Gersdorfinfringment actionEU valuesENCJlex NGOcivil societyRussiaIsraelforeign agents lawOrdo IurisOSCEOrganization of Security and Co-operation in EuropeEuropean Court of Human RightsFirst President of the Suprme CourtPresident of PolandPresident of the Republic of PolandJarosław GowinLGBTLGBT free zonesequalityLGBT ideology free zonespopulismMateusz MorawieckiPrime Ministerequal treatmentfundamental rightspoliceCT PresidentJustice Defence Committee – KOSEUWhite Paperlustrationtransitional justicepublic opinion pollSupreme Court President2018Nations in TransitCouncil of the EUStanisław ZabłockiArticle 7European ParliamentLIBE CommitteeFrans TimmermansUS Department of StateSwieczkowskiSupreme Administrative Courtadvocate generalpress releaseRights and Values ProgrammeconditionalityEU budgetC-619/18defamatory statementsWorld Justice Project awardintimidation of dissentersWojciech SadurskijudgetransferPechKochenovEvgeni TanchevFreedom in the WorldECJFrackowiakretirement ageAmnesty InternationalŁukasz PiebiakPiebiak gatehuman rightstrans-Atlantic valuesLSOlawyersAct of 20 December 2019repressive actKoen LenaertsharrassmentAlina CzubieniakMinistry of JusticeJustice FundGerard BirgfellerEwa Maciejewskapostal votepostal vote billPiS