Olsztyn 02/12/2019

Resolution 1

of the General Assembly of Judges of the Olsztyn Region

of 2 December 2019

We, judges of the Olsztyn region, demand:

• the restoration of a Constitutional Tribunal which is independent of political influences;
• the introduction of a representation in the NCJ which is in compliance with the Constitution;
• the cancellation of the extremely politicised system of disciplining judges;
• the introduction of a democratic system of electing court authorities without the involvement of the political factor;
• the immediate dismissal of disciplinary commissioners, Piotr Schab, Michał Lasota and Przemysław Radzik;
• the immediate dismissal of the president of the District Court in Olsztyn, Maciej Nawacki, who betrayed his judicial oath by removing Judge Paweł Juszczyszyn from his judicial activities;
• the immediate reinstatement of Judge Paweł Juszczyszyn to office to continue adjudicating.

Resolution 2  

of the General Assembly of Judges of the Olsztyn Region

of 2 December 2019

Having regard for the right of every citizen to having his case heard by an independent and impartial court, in view of the wording of the ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 19 November 2019 in joined cases C-585/18, C-624/18 and C-625/18, the General Assembly of Judges of the Olsztyn Region is refraining from giving its opinion on the candidates to judicial offices within the area of the Olsztyn region until the Supreme Court decides on the cases of case reference III PO 7/18, III PO 8/18 and III PO 9/18.

Anyone, whose case is being settled in court, must be certain that the judgment in his case is issued by a judge appointed to the position in a correct procedure, which satisfies the requirements of not only the national regulations, but also the law of the European Union and international conventions, including, in particular, regarding the protection of human rights.

No citizen should be concerned that the final judgment he has received will be considered non-existent and non-executable in the future, either in Poland or abroad.

When judges appointed in a defective procedure issue judgments, this creates a threat of compensation from the State Treasury for breaching the right to a trial, as well as damages caused by judgments that are issued but which would be legally ineffective, the level of which is difficult to estimate.

Our decision is determined by our feeling of responsibility for the functioning of the State and our care for the observance of human rights.  We want to prevent the legal chaos that can arise if new judges continue to be appointed in a procedure which gives rise to doubts as to its legal effectiveness.

Resolution 3 

of the General Assembly of Judges of the Olsztyn Region

of 2 December 2019

The General Assembly of Judges of the Olsztyn Region expresses its adamant disapproval of the conduct of the secretary of state at the Ministry of Justice, Michał Wójcik, who, when speaking up on the ruling of the Regional Court in Olsztyn of 20 November 2019 ordering the Head of the Chancellery of the Sejm to present documents in the form of applications, as well as lists of citizens and judges supporting the candidates to the membership of the new National Council of the Judiciary, as well as the declarations of the citizens or judges on the withdrawal of their support for these candidates, in the programme broadcast in TVN24 on 24 November 2019, stated that this decision of the court “is a simple route to anarchy” and should be analysed in disciplinary proceedings and, in an interview with a journalist from TVN24 on 25 November 2019, added that “the judge committed a very serious disciplinary tort.”

We treat the words of the deputy minister of justice as a breach of the constitutional principle expressed in Article 178, para. 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, according to which, when exercising their office, judges are independent and subject only to the Constitution and statutes.  The objective of this principle is to guarantee the judge freedom of all pressure and is supposed to ensure that his decisions are impartial and in compliance with his conscience.  The impartiality of judges is the foundation of the functioning of an independent judiciary and other authorities are constitutionally obliged to respect it.

We also have no doubts that the decision of the Minister of Justice to dismiss District Court Judge Paweł Juszczyszyn from his secondment to the Regional Court in Olsztyn is related to the decision he issued.  This decision, which is deprived of any justification and which was issued immediately after the content of the said decision was publicised, should be treated as a blatant retaliation, essentially constituting an attack on judicial impartiality.

We treat the words spoken by the secretary of state, the decision of the Minister of Justice to dismiss District Court Judge Paweł Juszczyszyn from his secondment at the Regional Court in Olsztyn, the initiation of disciplinary proceedings against Judge Paweł Juszczyszyn on 28 November 2019 by the Deputy Commissioner of Ordinary Court Judges, Michał Lasota, and the order of the President of the District Court, Maciej Nawacki of 29 November 2019 regarding the immediate stoppage by Judge Paweł Juszczyszyn of his official activities, as an attempt to intimidate Polish judges, which has the objective of inciting a so-called chilling effect and stopping judges from applying the guidelines contained in the ruling of the CJEU of 19 November 2019, issued in joined cases C-585/18, C-624/18 and C-625/18.

We would also like to point out the body called the National Council of the Judiciary did not react to the words of the secretary of state and the decision to recall Judge Paweł Juszczyszyn from his secondment, as well as the words of the Minister of Justice, Zbigniew Ziobr, who, when commenting on his decision in the media, mentioned the “anarchisation of the Polish judiciary and the overstepping of rights by judges”.

This silence, which speaks for itself, in a situation of such a gross breach of judicial independence, is yet another example of the fact that this body does not actually safeguard the independence of the courts and the impartiality of judges, contrary to its role specified in Article 186, para. 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland.