DISCIPLINARY COMMISSIONER

OF THE ORDINARY COURT JUDGES

COMMUNICATION
of the Disciplinary Commissioner of the Ordinary Court Judges
on the initiation of disciplinary proceedings against Paweł J., Judge of the District Court in Olsztyn

I declare that Judge Michał Lasota, the deputy disciplinary commissioner of the ordinary court judges, initiated disciplinary proceedings against Paweł J., a judge of the District Court in Olsztyn, on 28 November 2019 and pressed charges on him of having committed disciplinary offences under Article 107 § 1 of the Act on the System of Ordinary Courts of 27 July 2001 (Journal of Laws of 2019, item 52) by the fact that:

1) he overstepped his authority on 20 November 2019 in Olsztyn such that, as a public official, namely as a judge in the panel of the Regional Court in Olsztyn, as the presiding judge and rapporteur, while examining the case of case reference IX Ca 1302/19 regarding the defendant’s appeal against the judgment of the District Court in Lidzbark Warmiński of 7 June 2019 in the case of case reference I C 517/19, the panel of which included a judge as the presiding judge and rapporteur, whose application for appointment to the office of judge was presented to the President of the Republic of Poland by a resolution of the National Council of the Judiciary on 9 January 2019, he brought about a decision being issued without legal grounds, by which the Head of the Chancellery of the Sejm was ordered “to present original or officially certified copies of documents in the form of documents submitted to the Chancellery of the Sejm in connection with the announcement by the Marshal of the Sejm of the Republic of Poland of 4 January 2018 of the start of the procedure of nominating candidates to the membership of the National Council of the Judiciary to be elected from among the judges (official journal, Monitor Polski, item 10) with the applications and lists of citizens and lists of judges supporting the candidates for membership of the National Council of the Judiciary, as referred to in Article 11a and Article 11b of the Act on the National Council of the Judiciary of 12 May 2011 (consolidated text, Journal of Laws of 2019, item 84, as amended), who were subsequently elected to the National Council of the Judiciary under a resolution of the Sejm of the Republic of Poland of 6 March 2018 on the election of members of the National Council of the Judiciary (official journal Monitor Polski, item 276) and the declarations of citizens or judges on the withdrawal of support for these candidates, and to submit these documents to the Regional Court in Olsztyn to attach them to the file of case reference IX Ca 1302/19 upr. – within one week of service of a copy of this order to the Chancellery of the Sejm – under the sanction of the application of a fine in the event of the unreasonable refusal to present all the documents referred to above”, awarding himself the power to assess the correctness, including the legality of the choice of members of the National Council of the Judiciary, and thereby awarding himself the right to assess the correctness, including the legality of the President of the Republic of Poland exercising the prerogative of appointing judges, acting to the detriment of the public interest expressed in the correct functioning of the judiciary, thereby breaching the dignity of the office;

2) he presented assertions and assessments related to his office regarding his secondment to the office of judge in the Regional Court in Olsztyn, as well as the cancellation of the secondment, to representatives of the media, which were then published in conflict with the provision of Article 89 § 1 of the Act on the System of Ordinary Courts of 27 July 2001.

Notwithstanding the above, the Deputy Disciplinary Commissioner of the Ordinary Court Judges pressed two further charges of disciplinary torts on Judge Paweł J. pursuant to Article 107 § 1 of the Act on the System of Ordinary Courts of 27 July 2001, regarding the provision of false testimony about the factual circumstances of motions submitted to exclude him from participation in two criminal proceedings.

Given that the first of the above disciplinary charges simultaneously constituted the exhaustion of the features of a crime of an abuse of power by a public official, which is prosecuted ex officio (Article 231 § 1 of the Penal Code), the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court has the jurisdiction to consider the case in the first instance.

(-) Regional Court Judge Piotr Schab

DISCIPLINARY COMMISSIONER
OF THE ORDINARY COURT JUDGES