A large stir and quite a few comments sparked a series of events, the beginning of which was the proceeding by the prosecutor Ewa Wrzetosek Mrs Barbara Skrzypek, a 66-year-old female who was a secretary of Jarosław Kaczyński many years ago. 3 days after this hearing, to which, by decision of D.A. Wrzosek, the witness' attorney, Ms. Barbara Skrzypek suffered, as stated, an extended myocardial infarction and died. Many people began to point out that Mrs. Barbara's death may have been due to an interrogation and excessive stress associated with this incident, where she was deprived of her attorney's support, and had to face 3 lawyers alone, as, in addition to Prosecutor Wrzosek, the proceeding was besides attended by 2 attorneys of the suing party.
The public will not be able to find out how the proceeding was going, as not only was the witness' lawyer not allowed and not recorded, but even the minutes were not present. All of this together causes the full thing to rise large doubts and more and more people, even among those who criticized the Law and Justices, point to the incorrect actions of the prosecutor towards the witness.
For example, Andrzej Seremet, lawyer General from 2010 to 2016, stated: “It was incorrect that the witness’s lawyer was not allowed to be interviewed. If it is actual that there were 2 attorneys for the victim, and if the witness referred to the state of wellness and was documented, the interest of the witness, as referred to in Article 87 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, had to be accepted.’ In an interview with the Republic of Poland, the president of the ultimate Bar Council, Mr Rosati, said: “I have not met with the case of not allowing the witness’s lawyer to conduct the interrogation of the witness in the prosecution.”
Those straight associated with the current authority besides have large doubts about this. Deputy talker of the Sejm and leader of the left Vladimir Czarzasty acknowledged:” I would not trust Mrs. Heath of this case." Even prof. Zoll, known for his criticism of the erstwhile government, assessed that the assignment of this case to Prosecutor Wrzosek “is a mistake”. Interestingly, even Boris Budka, the erstwhile president of the KO, now a Euro MP from this party, agreed with this opinion. These are just a fewer of the many voices that indicate that Mrs Herzosek's apparent political commitment should decide not to entrust her with this investigation, which was inactive assessed as having a political context. Already once, in February 2020, the Warsaw territory Court maintained the decision to refuse to analyse the case. In the case of Prosecutor Wrzosek, they draw her attention to any circumstantial comparisons of the current situation with the past. It referred not erstwhile to the alleged, in her opinion, similarities of today's times to the post-war ones. In her interview with “Politics”, she utilized the words “We live in postwar times, where “bands roam the forests”, the state is inactive at hazard and must act in a non-standard way. The D.A. has the right to justice for himself what action is compatible with the social interest. I have the courage to do it.” This is simply a very clear presentation of the situation and imagination of your own actions. It is besides hard to be amazed that many commentators have stated that Mrs. Wrzosek sees herself as an organizer, something like the fresh Augustów Oblast. Let me just remind you that originally this manhunt was carried out, just after the war, by the NKVD with the support of the military and the UB, and consisted of catching Poles, members of the underground independency and anti-communist. About 600 people went missing and their bodies were never found. These events are besides called “Little Katyn”.
For me, it is not so crucial that prosecutor Wrzosek's political engagement is here, due to the fact that there are fewer people who want to deny that it was very visible, but any peculiar elements of her beliefs that shocked me erstwhile I compiled them with the fact that she is simply a prosecutor. I mean, frequently quoted, her entry on the X platform, where she repeated the celebrated phrase from “Godfather” that “cold – tastes best ...revenge”. A fresh mobster, Vito Corleone, was talking about plans to kill his enemies.
The question is what does it mean that the prosecutor, or another public officer, uses, in his statements the concept of revenge, which can be assessed in the context of his actions and legal acts.
It is crucial to realise that the full sense of the existence of the prosecutor's office is that revenge, which was common in the erstwhile family, clan, or mafia structures, is completely eliminated from social life, while the prosecution of criminals is to be pursued by a public prosecutor who should be guided by justice alternatively than revenge.
How does a average citizen feel erstwhile the D.A. is talking about any kind of revenge today? And unfortunately, this is not an episode completely isolated. The case of justice Irena Kamińska is well known, who, at a conference organised by the Batory Foundation, confessed: “I will be honest, I want revenge.”
Can revengers be impartial and guarantee the regulation of law? Can a common citizen have assurance in specified persons and their actions? The Latin conviction is known – medicine, cura te ipsum – doctor, heal yourself. It may not only apply to doctors.
Stanisław Lewicki
