DISCIPLINARY COMMISSIONER OF                                                                                   Warsaw, 28 August 2019

THE JUDGES OF THE ORDINARY COURTS

COMMUNICATION

of the Disciplinary Commissioner of the Ordinary Court Judges

on the initiation of disciplinary proceedings against judges failing to comply

with the requirement to use social media with restraint

I declare that, pursuant to the findings of the clarification proceedings in the cases of a breach of the dignity of the office and the principles of professional ethics referred to in § 2, § 4, § 5 clause 2, § 10, 16 and 23 of the resolution of the National Council of the Judiciary of 19 February 2003 on the adoption of a set of rules of professional ethics for judges, Deputy Disciplinary Commissioner of the Ordinary Court Judges, Judge Przemysław W. Radzik initiated disciplinary proceedings and charged Waldemar Ż., judge of the Regional Court in Kraków, and Olimpia B.-M., judge of the District Court in Gorzów Wlkp., with disciplinary offences under Article 107 § 1 of the Law on the organization of the ordinary courts of 21 July 2001.

In particular, Judge Waldemar Ż. is suspected of breaching the dignity of the office in an interview on 4 July 2019, which was granted and posted on the Prawo.pl website under the title of ‘Judge Żurek: Kamil Zaradkiewicz wants to give the citizens chaos in the courts’, in which he announced a political manifesto on his views and assessments related to the operation of constitutional bodies of the state, including the Constitutional Tribunal and the National Council of the Judiciary, after which, when questioning the legitimacy of appointing Kamil Zaradkiewicz to the office of judge of the Supreme Court, he specified the legal questions asked by that court, in which Supreme Court Judge Kamil Zaradkiewicz was a member, regarding the legal status of judges appointed on the basis of resolutions of the National Council of the Judiciary in breach of the Constitution in 2011–2015, which he called a ‘setup’ intended to achieve a political goal, after which he slandered Supreme Court Judge Kamil Zaradkiewicz for acting with intent (…) to “put the Court of Justice of the European Union in check” by referring the Supreme Court’s legal questions to the Constitutional Tribunal, that is, he slandered him about such conduct that could humiliate him in public and expose him to a loss of the confidence needed to perform the office of Supreme Court judge, after which he threatened Judge Kamil Zaradkiewicz with unlawful future stigmatization and with holding him liable for acting ‘to the detriment of State and the citizens’, by which he breached the principle of being apolitical, which arises from Article 178, para. 3 of the Constitution and the obligation arising from Article 82 § 1 of the Act on the Organization of Ordinary Courts to act in accordance with the judicial oath, namely conduct that disgraces the dignity of a judge and undermines the confidence in his independence and impartiality and breaches the rules of professional ethics.

In turn, Judge Olimpia B.-M. was accused of failing to exercise restraint on 9 August 2019 and on 25 August 2019 in the use of social media:

– she slandered the appointed prosecutor of the National Prosecutor’s Office for such conduct that could humiliate him in public and expose him to a loss of the confidence required to practice the profession of prosecutor and judge in such a way that, when commenting in ‘Twitter’ on this candidate’s application for a vacant judicial position in the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court, she described him as a person who ‘does not have the experience and has breached human rights’, by which she breached the dignity of the office and the principles of professional ethics referred to in § 2, § 4, § 5 para. 2, § 10, 16 and 23 of the resolution of the National Council of the Judiciary of 19 February 2003 on the adoption of a set of principles of professional ethics of judges;

– she slandered Zbigniew Ziobro, the Minister of Justice, for such conduct that could humiliate him in public and expose him to a loss of the confidence required to perform public functions, including holding the office of the Minister of Justice, in such a way that she described him in ‘Twitter’ as the minister who ‘produced a scandal’ and ‘is responsible for creating a corruptive system in the courts and prosecutor’s office making the justice administration dependent on the political will’ by which she undermined the dignity of the office and the principles of professional ethics referred to in § 2, § 4, § 5 para. 2, § 10, 16 and 23 of the resolution of the National Council of the Judiciary of 19 February 2003 on the adoption of a set of principles of professional ethics of judges.

Pursuant to the wording of Article 82 § 1 of the Act on the Organization of Ordinary Courts, a judge is obliged to comply with the judge’s oath, namely, among other things the obligation to uphold the law and conscientiously fulfil the duties of a judge.

Pursuant to the aforementioned provisions of the Set of Principles of Professional Ethics of Judges and Trainee Judges, a judge may not even appear to disregard the legal order by his conduct; he is required to comply with the principles of honesty, dignity, honour and the observance of decency and to avoid conduct that could discredit the dignity of a judge and undermine the confidence in his impartiality and independence, as well as being obliged to use social media with restraint.

At the same time as these decisions were issued, the President of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court was asked to appoint disciplinary courts to hear the cases of the accused judges.

(-) Regional Court Judge Piotr Schab

DISCIPLINARY COMMISSIONER OF

THE JUDGES OF THE COMMON COURTS