The Szczecin territory Court decided to retreat the criminal transfer of the appeal justice from Warsaw, Ewa Gregajtys, to another faculty. This decision concerns 1 of the 3 appeal judges who were thus punished by president Piotr Schab for alleged infringement of European Union law. All these cases of court found illegal.
The ruling of the Szczecin-Centrum territory Court, issued on 4 December 2023, provides a circumstantial security, ordering the reinstatement of justice Eve Gregajtys to judgement in her home criminal department. This decision was made by justice Marek Burzyński, although it is not yet final, it is immediately enforceable. Although there is no written justification, it is assumed that the court held that the transfer of a justice violated the provisions of the Universal Courts Act.
This law allows for the transfer of judges between departments upon compliance with certain conditions. However, the president of the Court of Appeal in Warsaw, Piotr Schab, and his deputy Przemysław Radzik, violated these requirements by moving the justice without her permission. Both, while besides serving as disciplinary spokespersons, prosecute independent judges, supported by spokesperson Michał Lasota, all nominated by erstwhile Justice Minister Zbigniew Ziobra.
Judge Ewa Gregajtys, an experienced carnist, was transferred to the labour department in August 2022 along with 2 another judges as punishment for the execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ETPCz) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (TEU). These judgments undermined the legality of the fresh National Judicial Council (neo-KRS) and the nomination of neo-judges, which it had given. The judges consistently executed these sentences, undermining the position of the neo-judges, including Schab, Radzik, Lasota and neo-KRS associate Dariusz Drajewicz. In the light of the case law which follows completely the legality of the current KRS, it should be considered that all active members of this criminal institution are a group of organised criminals.
The judges did not break the actions of the court presidents. They fought to return to their criminal department and yet succeeded. First, in December 2022, ETPCz issued a precedent for withdrawing the transfer penalties. lawyer Peter Zemła helped in this matter. Despite the disregard for this safety by the president of the Court, the judges besides won in Polish courts that issued akin safeguards. justice Ewa Leszczyńska-Furtak was reinstated to work in the criminal department by the territory Court in Słupsk and justice Marzanna Piekarska-Drązek by the territory Court for Warsaw-Śródmieście.
Both judgments show that president Schab violated the provisions of the General Courts Act by transferring judges without their consent. In addition, he did not comply with the request to transfer judges with the lowest judicial experience in the criminal department. The president acting against the long-standing specialization of the judges acted to the detriment of the parties to the trials.
The court in Szczecin has now revoked the criminal transfer of justice Eve Gregajtys, confirming the breach of laws by Schab. This decision has possible criminal-disciplinary consequences for the president of the Court, and the prosecution has already been notified of the anticipation of committing a crime of abuse of power. In addition, Prof. Michał Romanowski announced a civilian action against the president of the Court for violating the good name of justice Gregajtys.
The Szczecin territory Court issued a security, withdrawing the criminal transfer of justice Eve Gregajtys, which is another phase in a long-term case. Earlier, the case was passed between the courts and the Warsaw judges refused to consider the application for safety in the case of justice Gregajtys, arguing that they were administratively subject to Schab's ‘president’.
After the case was referred to the Poznań court, he besides refused to issue the security, arguing that the president of the court had the right to decision the justice freely. In this situation Prof. Michał Romanowski filed a fresh application for security, which this time went to court in Szczecin.
Although justice Gregajtys has already ruled in his first department since September, prof. Romanowski did not revoke his motion, which resulted in the court's examination of the case. This is another lawyer's victory, which represents the repressed judges.
Prof. Romanowski besides succeeded in cases of unlawfully suspended judges of Igor Tulei from Warsaw and Paweł Yuszczyszyn from Olsztyn. Both cases ended with judicial decisions ordering the return of judges to work. justice Yuszczyszyn, suspended for more than 2 years, was suspended in May 2022, but was penalized by a associate of the illegal neo-KRS and “President” of the territory Court of Olsztyn, Maciej Nawacki.
We remind that thanks to the work of Prof. Romanowski, the territory Court in Bydgoszcz ordered the withdrawal of the criminal transfer of justice Yuszczyszyn, recognising that the president of the court violated the law on courts. Nawacki yet stepped down, and since December 2023 justice Yuszczyszyn re-judged in his first civilian department.
Prof. Romanowski expressed his joy at the latest win in the court in Szczecin, stressing that this expected collateral was the consequence of long-term efforts. He pointed out that justice was reinstated, and the ruling constitutes an crucial argument in the case of president Schab's civilian liability for violating the judge's good name. The prof. besides announced that they would request a settlement from the president of the Court for abuse of power. The ruling of the Szczecin court is essential given the ongoing disciplinary proceedings against a justice who refused to regulation in the labour department as a consequence of the ETPC Decision.
In order to prevent appeals judges from Warsaw from executing the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and of the Court of Justice of the European Union (EUSR), a fresh VIII Criminal Division was established in the Court of Appeal since October 2023. This department included both neo-judges and judges posted by the Minister of Justice. In the current II Criminal Division, there were those judges who applied European law, including 3 judges for whom the courts ordered the withdrawal of the transfer.
In a parallel trial, Deputy Chief Disciplinary Officer, Michał Lasota, initiating proceedings against appeal judges. He accuses them of their judgments and for the application of European law, with Lasota utilizing an illegal muzzle law. Even after the judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union in June 2023, which concluded that the muzzle law was incompatible with Union law, Lasota is breaking that decision. As a result, it exposes itself to possible disciplinary work and punishment. Lasota besides initiates disciplinary proceedings against judges of the criminal department, specified as Marzanna Piekarska-Drzeżek, Ewa Gregajtys, Ewa Leszczyńska-Furtak, Dorota Tyrala and Anna Kalbarczyk, for their application of European law. Additionally, he besides pursues civilian faculty judges specified as Beata Kozłowski and Joanna Wiśniewska-Sadomska for their rulings.
Prior to that, Lasota besides conducted disciplinary proceedings against justice Paulina Aslanowicz, who did not uncover belonging to a peculiar organization associated with her child's disease. The disclosure of membership of associations was ordered by the kangaroo law, but the TEU besides contested this issue in its June 2023 judgment.
Lasota yet resigned from further disciplinary proceedings against justice Aslanowicz. However, the justice decided to challenge the grounds for Lasota's surrender. In November 2023, the Disciplinary Court at the Lublin Court of Appeal changed the basis for the discharge of the case, passing from an assessment of the negligible social harm of the act to the deficiency of disciplinary action.
Lasota late joined the neo-judges of the Court of Appeals in Warsaw, where he cooperates with Schab and Radzik. The president appointed him to this court 2 days after the October elections. In addition, Lasota took the position of Vice-President of the Second Criminal Division in that court, which means that he is the superior of the judges he had previously prosecuted for the application of European law.
We remind you that the case law issued by the neo-judges is repealed by law. In the case of civilian proceedings pursuant to Article 379(4) in fine k.p.c. and criminal proceedings pursuant to Article 439(1)(6) in fine k.p.k.
What is neo-KRS and neo-Judge
The National Judicial Council was elected in a manner incompatible with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, which makes it impossible for the Court of Justice to recognise it in the light of the adopted line of the jurisprudence of the ultimate Court and the TEU as a body acting as acting and having the power to appoint judges. Any justice appointed by that unconstitutional authority and appointed by the president to execute is besides served by a noe-judge who has no legal capacity to issue judgment,
At this point it will be justified to rise that the problem of vocations of "judges" after the formation of the "National Judicial Council" as a consequence of changes in 2017 has respective aspects. The first is related to the provisions of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, which impose on public authorities, including the legislator, the work of specified appointment of judges to judicial duties, which guarantees the essential minimum independency and independency of the bodies active in the nomination process. This body is the National Judicial Board. engagement in constitutional standards for shaping the judicial composition of this body, creating an chance for politicians to form the Council, i.e. the election of members of the judges of the Council in their entirety by parliament (excluding the 1st president of the SN and the president of the NSA), has caused this body to neglect to meet constitutional requirements. This makes in any event the appointment of a justice question arise, which accompanies any man who puts his case under the judgement of the court, whether this court is simply a constitutional court.
In addition, this is the second aspect – in the doctrine to which I have given my hand, and in the case-law, there has been a method of verifying the correctness of the appointment of judges based on tools that have been in the strategy since forever, but mostly not utilized to measure the fulfilment of minimum conditions of impartiality and independence. It is the institutions (in the case of preventive control) – iudex sspectus and iudex inhabilis, and in the case of follow-up control – the absolute appeal condition, which is the incorrect cast of the court. On this thought the position of the resolution of the 3 Joint Chambers of the ultimate Court of January 2020 was placed. The resolution contained not precisely the right differentiation: indicating that, in the case of an SN, due to the nature of that authority, judges appointed after a advice of the KRS formed after 2017, do not supply guarantees of independent and impartial ruling. For this reason, it was considered that only this organization flaw justifies the claim that specified judges are deprived of material votum. The resolution did not competition that these persons had obtained the position of SN judges, but it was found that they had no power to issue judgments.
The judgments of specified ‘judges’ so far have been affected by the defect, given the inadequate cast of the court, which should be regarded as a failure to fulfil the constitutional request of the competent court referred to in Article 45(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. Failed judges should not rule. From the date of the resolution, these judges shall be incapable to rule. They do not have a material votum, although they have the position of judges. In the light of the above, it should be considered that, pursuant to Article 91(2) and (3) of the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union and of the ECHR, the rule of precedence of the application of the law
This is justified in the judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 6 October 2021 in Case C-487/19, as well as in the erstwhile judgement of the European Court of Human Rights of 7 May 2021, action No 4907/18. I remind the hooded court that, in accordance with Article 9 of the Constitution, the Republic of Poland is obliged to respect its binding global law. In accordance with Article 91(2) of the Constitution, an global agreement ratified with the prior consent expressed in the Act shall take precedence over the law if that law cannot be reconciled with the agreement. The position of judges and the guarantees of the independency of courts, which constitute the essence of the right to a fair trial, are enshrined in the provisions of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and are further confirmed in Article 6(3) of the Treaty on EU. In the present case, the judgement given on 7 October 2021 by the Constitutional Court in the present – defective – composition of the case in Case No. K 13/21, which reconciles the interests of citizens.
Our position on the neo-CRS and neo-Judges appointed by this unconstitutional body confirms the position of the European Commission, which decided on 15 February 2023 to mention Poland to the Court of Justice of the European Union in connection with the controversial ruling of the Polish Constitutional Court. The Commission opened infringement proceedings against Poland on 22 December 2021. – The reason was the judgments of the Polish Constitutional Court of 14 July 2021 and 7 October 2021, in which it declared the provisions of the EU treaties to be incompatible with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, explicitly questioning the rule of primacy of EU law. Without doubt, in light of the content of the judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union (Grand Chamber) of 19 November 2019 (Nos C 585/18, C-624/18, C 625/18) and the resolution of the full composition of the ultimate Court of 23 January 2020 (BSA I-4110-1/20), there is simply a basis for concluding that the institution designated to guarantee the regulation of law is breaking the law and commits the crime.
You request legal assistance, compose us or call us right now.
579-636-527
Contact@legartis.pl
From
Court: The criminal transfer of justice Gregajtys is unlawful. The pork has broken the bill again:
