The unruly media of the authorities, namely editors Morawiecki and Dworczyk in the Karnowskis’ portal

Share

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

More

Mateusz Morawiecki’s close associates have prepared a ready interview attacking the judges who ruled unfavourably for the prime minister during the local elections. It was published by the pro-government portal wPolityce.pl run by the brothers Jacek and Michał Karnowski.



by Roman Imielski

 

The article was published in Gazeta Wyborcza

 

The publication of the e-mails, which leaked from the current head of the Prime Minister’s Chancellery, Michał Dworczyk’s inbox, has meant that we could once again see what the intertwining of the ‘unruly’ media with the Law and Justice (PiS) party looks like [in Polish: media niepokorne, which stands for media favorable to the PiS ruling camp; the term was coined before PiS came to power in 2015 – eds.].

 

Information on the commissioning of the preparation of materials to people from TVP was posted earlier. This time, this is about the wPolityce.pl portal, which – just like the ‘Sieci’ weekly run by the Karnowski brothers – has tens of millions of zlotys pumped into it each year from advertisements of state-owned companies and state institutions.

 

The Karnowski brothers receive ready materials

 

The Karnowski brothers have been regarded as informal spokesmen for the PiS party for a long time. They like to spread slogans about independence and living with the truth. They claim they are the ‘unruly’ media.

 

All this is obviously a smokescreen. The PoufnaRozmowa.com website, which posts Michał Dworczyk [Chief of the Chancellery of the PM]’s emails, has just confirmed this.

 

Morawiecki wrote to Dworczyk and Jarosław Gajewski, a former journalist, now an expert at the Polish Development Fund, on 30 October 2018, just before the second round of the local elections.

 

The prime minister pasted in part of an article from wPolityce.pl: ‘Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki is to apologise to the mayor of Kraków for his words about the lack of action by the city authorities in the battle against smog. Attention was immediately drawn in Kraków to the fact that the adjudicating panel of the Court of Appeal in Kraków included judges who have made no secret of their dislike of the judicial reform. The Court of Appeal in Małopolska’s capital itself is also a bastion of rebellious judges who are ruthlessly attacking the current authorities. Two of the three judges ruling today in the actin filed by Majchrowski are judges actively supporting the ‘caste’.

 

And he recommends: ‘Do not “apologise”, but “correct”,’ although the rest of the narrative is interesting… ‘I spoke to Michał earlier and he is waiting for information nicely served on a platter from Jarek G. Ania, see to all of this’.

 

To this, Gajewski replies: ‘I have already written a ready interview for him [for Dworczyk]. He needs to quickly send it to wPolityce.pl. It’s rather strong :)))’. To which Dworczyk replied: ‘I have corrected some minor details and have sent it to Jacek Karnowski. It should be posted in the portal soon’.

 

And indeed, the ‘ready materials’ quickly appear on the portal of the Karnowski brothers with the title of: ‘Michał Dworczyk on the verdict in the prime minister’s case: I’m not surprised, because these are politicians in togas rather than judges’.

 

It is worth quoting the ‘ready material’, because its form – especially the questions – is very characteristic.

 

Below is a translation of the leaked email:

 

wPolityce.pl: However, after the judgment of the court of the first instance that was favourable for the Prime Minister, the Court of Appeal in Kraków ordered the head of the government to post a corrigendum after he stated at a convention in Kraków that the city authorities were ‘doing almost nothing’ to combat smog. How do you assess this decision of the court?

 

Michał Dworczyk, head of the Prime Minister’s Chancellery: I get the impression that in election-mode cases involving PiS politicians, we have a situation in which courts of the first instance assess the case on its merits and dismiss actions, while the higher-instance courts, namely, in this case, the court of appeal, assess the case in a highly political, extremely biased manner.

 

What do you mean?

 

It’s difficult not to get the impression that the Court of Appeal in Kraków is the most politicised court in Poland. Unfortunately. It can even be said that this court is in a kind of anti-government and anti-presidential amok.

 

Strong words.

 

That’s how I see it, that’s how I assess it. Just imagine that, as recently as a fortnight ago, the judges of the Court of Appeal in Kraków passed nine resolutions, eight of which were critical of the government’s and the president’s actions! They applied to the method of appointing judges to the Supreme Court, the functioning of the National Council of the Judiciary and other aspects of the reform of the Polish judiciary; one of the resolutions applied to the fact that most of these resolutions are to be translated into English and sent around Europe. This is curious! Although the most scandalous one is the one in which the judges of the Court of Appeal in Kraków assess that the conduct of the Polish President qualifies for putting Andrzej Duda up before the Tribunal of State. So, if you are asking me whether I am surprised by today’s ruling of that court in the prime minister’s case, then no – I am absolutely not surprised, because these are politicians in robes rather than judges in robes. It’s a shame that none of the resolutions of the judges apply, for example, to speeding up court hearings and treating witnesses with dignity.

 

 

Of course, both Dworczyk, Morawiecki and the Karnowskis are not even mentioning the publication of the ‘ready materials’. Instead, the old narrative is that the stolen emails are the work of the Russians and are manipulated. However, nobody has specified any manipulation in any of the disclosed correspondence to date. On the contrary, the authenticity of many emails has been publicly confirmed. Meanwhile, the Polish secret services have not yet presented a report on precisely who is behind the publication of the correspondence of the head of the Prime Minister’s Chancellery.

 

Instead, on 23 May, the Zaufana Trzecia Strona (Trusted Third Party) portal reported that the Internal Security Agency ordered the Polish telecommunications operators to block the PoufnaRozmowa.com website. Although, this is very easy to circumvent – all that is needed is, for example, a VPN.

 

Przyłębska, a star with Sakiewicz

In the shadow of ‘Dworczyk’s ready materials’, you might not have noticed that we have just witnessed another example of the intertwining of the authorities with the ‘unruly’ media. This time it is about the convention of the ‘Gazeta Polska’ Clubs in Sulejów and the performance by Julia Przyłębska, president of the Constitutional Tribunal appointed by PiS, and party leader Jarosław Kaczyński’s “social discovery”.

 

There is no need to remind you that tens of millions of zlotys are also flowing to Tomasz Sakiewicz’s media from companies and institutions controlled by the government. And it was precisely he who was the host of Saturday’s panel, at which the star was Przyłębska.

 

‘Sovereignty should be our roadmap,’ she assured. ‘I am not treating this as a political meeting for one party or another, I am treating it as a meeting for Poland, in support of Poland,’ she added.

 

She argued that ‘the defects of democracy should be acknowledged. And therefore, democratic elections, in which the majority wins, should be respected. The institutions specified in the constitution should be respected and should work in peace. And even if we don’t agree with everything, we should assert our rights through the law and not through anarchy.’

 

She emphasised that the constitution is most important: ‘This is our constitution; it is the supreme law and we should respect it, not only by wearing it on t-shirts, but also by not misinforming the public about what it is saying.’

 

She finally stated: ‘What has been brought about today in many areas, including by preventing the Constitutional Tribunal from operating peacefully, is precisely the result of the anarchisation of public life.

 

Przyłębska almost certainly was not and is not aware of how comical she herself is in this role. She is managing a legal shell that is still referred to as the ‘Constitutional Tribunal’ – with stand-ins and former PiS MPs within its membership. The authorities are treating the constitution like dirt and did not hesitate to interrupt the constitutional term of the National Council of the Judiciary in 2018. Przyłębska herself plays hostess to Kaczyński and Morawiecki at Sunday lunches, while Sakiewicz’s and Karnowski’s media are the armed media arm of the ruling party.

 

This is what ‘unruliness’ – not only in the pro-government media – looks like today.



Author


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


More

Published

June 20, 2022

Tags

Supreme CourtConstitutional TribunalDisciplinary ChamberPolandjudgesdisciplinary proceedingsrule of lawZbigniew ZiobroNational Council of the JudiciaryCourt of Justice of the EUjudicial independenceEuropean CommissionEuropean UnionAndrzej DudaMałgorzata ManowskaCourt of JusticeEuropean Court of Human RightsMinister of JusticeIgor Tuleyadisciplinary systemAdam Bodnarmuzzle lawJarosław KaczyńskiNational Recovery PlanCJEUMateusz MorawieckiCommissioner for Human Rightsneo-judgesCourt of Justice of the European UniondemocracyPrzemysław RadzikWaldemar ŻurekNational Council for Judiciarypresidential electionselectionselections 2023disciplinary commissionercriminal lawJulia PrzyłębskaPiotr SchabKamil Zaradkiewiczmedia freedomharassmentpreliminary rulingsHungarySupreme Administrative Courtelections 2020K 3/21Dagmara Pawełczyk-WoickajudiciaryFirst President of the Supreme CourtŁukasz PiebiakprosecutorsPresidentRecovery FundBeata MorawiecPaweł JuszczyszynProsecutor GeneralMichał Lasotafreedom of expressionMaciej NawackiEuropean Arrest WarrantSejmprosecutionCOVID-19Regional Court in KrakówCriminal ChamberNational ProsecutorConstitutionPrime MinisterMinistry of JusticecourtsMałgorzata GersdorfMarek SafjanEU budgetdisciplinary liability for judgesMaciej FerekOSCEWojciech HermelińskiExtraordinary Control and Public Affairs ChamberIustitiacriminal proceedingsWłodzimierz WróbelVenice Commissionconditionality mechanismAleksander StepkowskiTHEMISLabour and Social Security ChamberStanisław BiernatPiScommission on Russian influenceStanisław PiotrowiczPresident of the Republic of PolandNCJimmunityconditionalityAnna DalkowskaJustice FundcorruptionLaw and JusticeNational Public ProsecutorCouncil of Europefreedom of assemblyKrystian MarkiewiczreformsReczkowicz and Others v. PolandKrzysztof Parchimowiczacting first president of the Supreme Court2017policeSenateAndrzej Zollmedia independenceSLAPPdefamationStrategic Lawsuits Against Public ParticipationLGBTJustice Defence Committee – KOSEwa ŁętowskaDidier ReyndersFreedom HouseAmsterdam District CourtMay 10 2020 electionsXero Flor w Polsce Sp. z o.o. v. PolandOrdo IurisPresident of PolandAndrzej StępkaBroda and Bojara v PolandSylwia Gregorczyk-AbramPiotr GąciarekJarosław WyrembakPM Mateusz MorawieckiArticle 7Next Generation EUConstitutional Tribunal PresidentUrsula von der LeyenLex DudaTVPmediaLex Super OmniaProfessional Liability ChamberreformJarosław DudziczK 7/21National Reconstruction PlansuspensionparliamentChamber of Professional LiabilityEAWArticle 6 ECHRP 7/20Supreme Court PresidentLech GarlickiMichał WawrykiewiczabortionPiotr PrusinowskiNational Electoral Commissionelectoral codeJanusz NiemcewiczTeresa Dębowska-RomanowskaStanisław RymarMałgorzata Pyziak- SzafnickaKazimierz DziałochaBogdan ŚwięczkowskiNetherlandsAndrzej MączyńskiMarek MazurkiewiczvetoStefan JaworskiMirosław GranatOLAFBiruta Lewaszkiewicz-PetrykowskaViktor OrbanJózef IwulskiMaciej MiteraSLAPPsjudcial independenceWojciech ŁączkowskiAdam JamrózPATFoxFerdynand RymarzKonrad WytrykowskiRafał Puchalskismear campaignmilestonesKrakówMarzanna Piekarska-Drążekstate of emergencyUkraineelectoral processBelaruscourt presidentsAdam SynakiewiczXero Flor v. PolandAstradsson v Icelandright to fair trialEdyta BarańskaJoanna Hetnarowicz-SikoraCentral Anti-Corruption BureauJakub IwaniecsurveillancePegasusDariusz DrajewiczJoanna Misztal-KoneckaCivil ChamberK 6/21Wojciech MaczugaSzymon Szynkowski vel SękDariusz ZawistowskiOKO.presselections integrityelections fairnessMarek ZubikBohdan ZdziennickiMirosław WyrzykowskiSławomira Wronkowska-JaśkiewiczPiotr TulejaJerzy StępieńAndrzej RzeplińskitransparencyMariusz KamińskiMaciej Taborowskiinsulting religious feelingsPaweł Filipekpublic mediaMariusz MuszyńskiKrystyna PawłowiczlexTuskcourt changesMarek PietruszyńskiMichał LaskowskiSupreme Audit Officeabuse of state resourcesLaw on the NCJEuropean ParliamentJarosław GowincoronavirusRussiaZuzanna Rudzińska-BluszczFree Courts11 January March in WarsawCCBEPiebiak gatehuman rightsrecommendationC-791/19Human Rights CommissionerMarcin WarchołLGBT ideology free zonesreportEuropean Association of JudgesPiotr Pszczółkowskiretirement agedecommunizationGeneral Assembly of the Supreme Court Judgesintimidation of dissentersdemocratic backslidingpublic opinion pollZiobroEU law primacyMarian BanaśThe Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europecriminal codeBelgiumlex NGOEwa Wrzosekcivil societytransferAdam Tomczyńskimedia pluralismBohdan Bieniek#RecoveryFilesFrans TimmermansLIBE Committeerepairing the rule of lawUS Department of StateMarcin KrajewskiKarolina Miklaszewska2018NGOFull-Scale Election Observation MissionODIHRNations in TransitStanisław ZabłockiPetros TovmasyanJerzy KwaśniewskiPiotr MazurekGrzegorz PudaNational Recovery Plan Monitoring CommitteeWiesław KozielewiczChamber of Extraordinary Control and Public AffairsMałgorzata Dobiecka-WoźniakCouncil of the EURafał LisakMichał DworczykWojciech Sadurskidefamatory statementsRome StatuteInternational Criminal CourtC-619/18Rights and Values Programmejudgepress releaseAntykastalex WoślegislationCourt of Appeal in KrakówPutinismKaczyńskiPaulina AslanowiczJarosław MatrasMałgorzata Wąsek-Wiaderekct on the Protection of the PopulatioWorld Justice Project awardStanisław ZdunIrena BochniakKrystyna Morawa-FryźlewiczŁukasz BilińskiIvan MischenkoJoanna Kołodziej-MichałowiczMonika FrąckowiakArkadiusz CichockiEmilia SzmydtTomasz SzmydtE-mail scandalAndrzej SkowronKasta/AntykastaKatarzyna Chmuraadvocate generalGrzegorz FurmankiewiczMarek JaskulskiEwa ŁąpińskaZbigniew ŁupinaPaweł StyrnaSwieczkowskiDworczyk leaksMałgorzata FroncHater ScandalAleksandra RutkowskaGeneral Court of the EUArkadiusz RadwanLech WałęsaWałęsa v. Polandright to an independent and impartial tribunal established by lawpilot-judgmentDonald Tusk governmentRafał WojciechowskiDobrochna Bach-Goleckalex RaczkowskiPiotr Raczkowskithe Spy ActdisinformationCT Presidentfundamental rightsNational Broadcasting Councilelection fairnessequal treatmentcivil lawMarcin MatczakDariusz KornelukNational School of Judiciary and Public Prosecution (KSSiP)codification commissiondelegationsWatchdog PolskaDariusz BarskiLasotapopulismState TribunalRadosław BaszukAction PlanJustice MinistryVěra JourováDonald Tuskjustice system reformAnti-SLAPP Directiveinsultgag lawsuitsstrategic investmentinvestmentlustrationJakub KwiecińskidiscriminationAct on the Supreme Courtelectoral commissionsEuropean Court of HuKrzysztof RączkaPoznańTomasz Koszewskitest of independenceSebastian MazurekElżbieta Jabłońska-MalikJoanna Scheuring-WielgusoppositionThe National Centre for Research and DevelopmentAdam Gendźwiłłtransitional justiceDariusz DończykKoan LenaertsKarol WeitzZbigniew KapińskiAnna GłowackaCourt of Appeal in WarsawOsiatyński'a ArchiveEUUS State DepartmentAssessment Actenvironmentextraordinary commissionWhite PaperKaspryszyn v PolandNCR&DNCBiREuropean Anti-Fraud Office OLAFJustyna WydrzyńskaAgnieszka Brygidyr-DoroszJoanna KnobelCrimes of espionageJędrzej Dessoulavy-ŚliwińskiMarek Piertuszyńskihate speechhate crimesmedia taxadvertising taxmediabezwyboruJacek KurskiKESMAIndex.huGrzęda v PolandŻurek v PolandPrzemysław CzarnekJacek CzaputowiczMarcin RomanowskiElżbieta KarskaPrzemysła Radzikmedia lawRafał TrzaskowskiSobczyńska and Others v PolandTelex.huJelenForum shoppingFirst President of the Suprme CourtEuropean Economic and Social CommitteeSebastian KaletaOrganization of Security and Co-operation in EuropeC-156/21C-157/21foreign agents lawArticle 2Rome IIJózsef SzájerChamber of Extraordinary VerificationKlubrádióequalityGazeta WyborczaLGBT free zonesPollitykaBrussels Ilegislative practiceENAZbigniew BoniekAK judgmentautocratizationMultiannual Financial FrameworkOpenbaar MinisterieRegional Court in Amsterdamabortion rulingArticle 10 ECHRprotestsinterim measuresLeszek MazurIrena MajcherAmsterdamLMmutual trustthe Regional Court in Warsawpublic broadcasterUnited NationsForum Współpracy Sędziówthe NetherlandsDenmarkact on misdemeanoursCivil Service ActParliamentary Assembly of the Council of EuropeNorwegian Ministry of Foreign AffairsNorwegian fundsNorwayKraśnikOmbudsmanKarlsruheAusl 301 AR 104/19SwedenFinlandMariusz KrasońC-487/19GermanyCelmerC354/20 PPUC412/20 PPUIrelandMarek AstLSOright to protestSławomir JęksaWiktor JoachimkowskiRoman Giertychtrans-Atlantic valuesMichał WośMinistry of FinancelawyersMirosław Wróblewskirepressive actborderprimacyEU treatiesAgnieszka Niklas-BibikSłupsk Regional CourtMaciej RutkiewiczAct of 20 December 2019Amnesty InternationalJacek SasinEvgeni TanchevKochenovPechPaulina Kieszkowska-KnapikMaria Ejchart-DuboisAgreement for the Rule of LawPorozumienie dla PraworządnościAct sanitising the judiciaryFreedom in the WorldECJErnest BejdaThe First President of the Supreme CourtMaciej CzajkaMariusz JałoszewskiŁukasz RadkepolexitFrackowiakDolińska-Ficek and Ozimek v PolandRzeszówKoen LenaertsharrassmentOlimpia Barańska-Małuszeinfringment actionHudocPKWKonrad SzymańskiPiotr BogdanowiczPiotr BurasLeon KieresIpsosEU valuesNational Prosecutor’s OfficeBogdan ŚwiączkowskiDisicplinary ChamberTribunal of StateOlsztyn courtPrzemysła CzarnekEducation MinisterENCJauthoritarian equilibriumArticle 258postal voteTVNjournalistslexTVNEwa MaciejewskaGerard BirgfellerPolish mediaAlina CzubieniakSimpson judgmentpostal vote billclientelismoligarchic systemEuropean Public Prosecutor's Officeresolution of 23 January 2020Polish National FoundationLux VeritatisMałgorzata BednarekPiotr WawrzykIsrael