Jarosław Kaczyński, president of Law and Justice, was punished with reproof by the Parliamentary Committee on Ethics. This is the direct consequence of the tumultuous incidental of April this year, erstwhile Kaczyński called MP Roman Giertych "the main sadist" during the session of the Sejm. This decision, made on 23 July, concerns not only the leader of the Law and Justice, but besides respective another Members who took part in a loud fight. In the background of the events, there were besides accusations of "murder" directed towards Giertych and an exchange of opinions that shook parliament and sparked wide media comments.
Culis of the Storm Session of the Sejm: “Chief Sadist” and “Lobuz”
April of this year brought scenes that have long been in the memory of Polish politics. During the session of the Sejm, Jarosław Kaczyński requested the convening of the elder Convention to discuss "Humanity in a Fighting Democracy". In his speech he referred to the death of Barbara Skrzypek and the controversial decision to decision Richard Cyba, the killer of PiS activist Mark Rosiak. It was in this context that the words that became the root of the conflict came out.
Just before coming down from the speaker, PiS president, pointing to Citizen Coalition MP Roman Giertych, said: “We have a sadist in the main hall, a certain (Roman) Giertych.” This direct and harsh message triggered an immediate reaction. Roman Gierty, taking the floor, referred to the charge: “I was named a sadist by MP Kaczyński.” At this point, Jarosław Kaczyński again approached the speaker, to whom Gierty responded with the words: “Jarku, sit down, calm down.” The president of the Law and Justice was equally emotional: “I am not with you by name, you rascal!” Roman Giertych reposted: “I am not with you, Mr. Kaczyński, by name, but the researchers of genealogy have shown that I am the uncle of Mr. Kaczyński. Call me uncle, Jarek.” The full situation led to an escalation of tension, erstwhile PiS MPs began to press on the speaker, shouting, among others, “Get off the speaker, murderer!” Deputy talker of the Sejm Piotr Zgorzelski had to order a break to control the situation.
Proposal for a Game and Decision of the Ethics Commission
In consequence to the April events, Roman Gierty immediately, due to the fact that on the next day, he made a formal request to the Parliamentary Committee on Ethics. He pointed out six Members of Law and Justice whose conduct, in his opinion, violated the principles of parliamentary ethics. The list included: Jarosław Kaczyński, Iwona Arent, Przemysław Czarnek, Bartosz Kownacki, Anna Krupka and Antoni Macierewicz.
The Committee on Ethics, chaired by Jack planet (PiS), dealt with the case at 2 meetings. The final decision was made on 23 July and the first information about it was given by ‘Rzeczpospolita’. The process of examining the application was detailed and each case of the MP was assessed individually for violating the parliamentary code of ethics.
Specific Penalties: Reproof and Nagana for Law and Justice Members
The results of the proceedings of the Committee on Ethics are clear and give an crucial signal on standards of conduct in Parliament. As president Jacek Świat said, most of the Members mentioned in Roman Giertych's proposal received a reminder. This means that Jarosław Kaczyński, Przemysław Czarnek, Bartosz Kownacki, Anna Krupka and Antoni Macierewicz were formally reproved for their behaviour during the April session of the Sejm.
The exception was the PiS MP, Iwona Arentwhose punishment was more severe. She received a reprimand, which is simply a more serious disciplinary measure. This decision was due to the fact that it was Arent's MP, during the event, who was to shout to Roman Giertych the words "get down murderer". The president of the planet stressed that the full committee, including himself, voted in favour of punishing the MP, which shows unanimity in assessing the seriousness of her wrongdoing.
What Does Reproof and Nagana Mean in the Sejm? applicable Effects
The decisions of the Committee on Ethics, specified as reproof or reprimand, are primarily moral and prestigious. They do not affect direct financial sanctions or suspension of parliamentary rights. Their main nonsubjective is to draw attention to the Member's inappropriate behaviour and remind him of the request to comply with the Code of Parliamentary Ethics. Reminder is simply a milder form of formal attention to the deficiency. In turn reprimand is simply a more serious measure, publically stigmatizing behaviour considered grossly incompatible with parliamentary ethics.
Despite the deficiency of direct legal implications, specified penalties may affect the image of the associate and his authority in the eyes of the public and another parliamentarians. In the context of Google Discover, where transparency and credibility are important, information about specified decisions is crucial for raising public awareness of public policy standards and accountability. It is simply a signal that even at the highest levels of power there are certain rules of conduct, and their violation is met with a formal reaction.
Read more:
Kaczyński punished for “sadist”. The Commission for the Ethics of the Members has decided!
