I again only to a part of you – that part that does not blindly believe government propaganda. In the same case as in Last year: Courts.
From the propaganda hearings, I conclude that for the time being the Irish court's decision is simply a conventional one, focusing on the judge. Aileen Donnelly of the Irish ultimate Court thus joined an increasingly long list of Europeans and Europeans who do not realize the reforms of Minister Ziobro.
He usually follows. personal attackto a peculiar judge, MEP or EU Commissioner. That lesbian. That alcoholic. That he didn't get adequate votes. That in his country there are even bigger scandals and let him deal with them first (etc.).
I say any of you have believed this propaganda to any point. In December 2017, it was evident to any that Morawiecki is simply a large candidate for Prime Minister due to the fact that he knows English and he will yet explain it to them in their language.
But the most intelligent part of you I'm sending this letter to must already see that it's not working. The only consequence of specified attacks is that the list of enemies of a "good change" extends to e.g. the full association of judges of Ireland.
I do not want to get into how much Polish courts request (or do not need) urgent reforms. I besides don't like all judgments (though reason tells me that all sentences would only delight me if I were a dictator).
Whatever – you must most likely see that Poland has a problem. It is highly likely that akin sentences will now be passed in another European and American countries.
This is our common problem, due to the fact that it makes Poland a paradise for criminals. It is adequate that they flee to the US or to the Union (and possibly it is adequate that they appeal to Strasbourg) and the local court will recognise their line of defence that they cannot number on a fair trial in Poland.
The Polish counter-argument that “listen, it is known that it is simply a drug dealer, give it to us”, will not work. Civilised courts do not issue judgments on a ‘know-it’ basis. That's how Tusk tried to fight the old man, too.
Personal attacks won't help. Even if government propaganda announces that the origin of the problem is simply a lesbian alcoholic who should deal with corruption in her country, the problem will not get smaller (it will become bigger, due to the fact that this attitude of Polish authorities and government media is not utilized to build a good image of Poland in the West).
The origin of the problem is very simple and I've already written to you about it. Not me, of course. Anyway, a couple of smart people predicted it would end this way, and you wouldn't believe it, due to the fact that propaganda told you it was adequate that Morawiecki would explain it in English and contact them. It's time to draw conclusions.
Well, regardless of language, it looks the same in all civilized country. The justice must be independent of power and from the prosecution.
In the U.S., it's adequate to point out that the jury has a connection with the D.A. Yeah, I know, we're not in the States, we don't have a jury, but the regulation is the same.
It can't be that Ziobro takes over the D.A.'s manual control and simultaneously chooses the KRS. The specified indication of the unions of fresh members KRS with Ziobra It is adequate that for Western judges the judgments of Polish courts become a part of paper.
The government usually explains that "many solutions introduced in Poland on how to choose judges to the National Judicial Council have been successfully operating in Western European countries for years" (literal quote from the interview of deputy minister Warchoła for pro-government service wpotylice.pl).
No 1 denies that “many.” A combination of all elements is important.
In no civilized country can it be that the ruling group arbitrarily sends judges to quit and replaces them with its denominations. There can't be any way that the same guy runs the D.A.'s office and his co-workers run the courts. In no way can it be that Parliament itself chooses a tribunal to measure the constitutionality of its actions.
Even if in any country we have the Minister's nomination, it turns out that individual else chooses them. Or that they are forever irrevocabable – etc.
You may not like this, dear writers, but the U.S. and the Union simply recognise only specified justice. And even though your arguments in beautiful English are recited to them by Stephen Fry, you will not convince them.
You have put Poland in serious trouble. What are you going to do about it?
