They rejected arrest requests, the prosecutor’s office scrutinises the court
The court in Szczecin twice rejected prosecutors’ requests for arrest in the so-called Police scandal. Now the same prosecutor’s office initiates proceedings against the judges in relations to negligence. “What country do we live in,” asks Włodzimierz Łyczywek, the dean of the District Bar Council in Szczecin.
“This is an inadmissible pressure on courts,” layers thunder. The Regional Prosecutor’s Office in Szczecin, after the District Court twice rejected its arrest requests for 10 former members of management board of the Chemical Plant Police, initiated criminal proceedings against this court.
Paragraph for judges
The official response from the spokesperson of the prosecutor’s office, Anna Jóźwiak, reads that “the proceedings concern the abuse of power by the judges responsible for appointing the composition of the court.” The investigators suspect the offence under art. 231 paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code, that is action of a public functionary to the detriment of the public interest. That is punishable by the deprivation of liberty up to three years. The accusations do not concern the judges who as court decided to reject the arrest requests, but the ones who appointed that composition of the court.
The prosecutor’s office does not provide any detailed information about the accusations. Jóźwiak does not want to talk about the case in front of the camera, either. The only thing she confirmed to us was that it was about the composition of courts appointed to clarify the so-called “Police scandal”.
Members of the former management board of the Chemical Plant in Police were detained in June by the Central Anticorruption Bureau on request of the Regional Prosecutor’s Office, which accuses the suspects, among other things, of acting to the detriment of the company, exposing the company to high losses by making unfavourable financial and business decisions, that is of the so-called management crime.
It is known that the investigators are looking into the investment of purchasing three deposits of phosphates in Senegal. The investment was to make the chemical giant independent from the purchase of raw materials in the free market. “One deposit was depleted quickly, in the second there were no phosphates, and the third is still being explored at enormous costs,” informed the Central Anticorruption Bureau. The decisions on this investment were made precisely by the management board headed by Krzysztof J.
The prosecutor’s office requested arrest for 10 suspects. However, the court considered there was no need for arrest and rejected the motions. The prosecutor’s office appealed, but once again it received a refusal of the arrest.
The minister of justice himself, Zbigniew Ziobro, commented then on the case. “It is unacceptable that sometimes we deal with trivial situations when courts use temporary arrest towards defenceless, weak, homeless, even ill people and the law enforcement bodies are merciless, strict and very harsh, and towards perpetrators suspected of multimillion fraud courts show their magnanimity and do not use the means provided for in Polish law,” said the minister after the court’s decision.
Court: weak evidence
“The court did not take into consideration successive complaints made by the prosecutor’s office about the rulings of the District Court Szczecin-Prawobrzeże i Zachód on non-using arrest towards the former president of the Azoty Chemical Plant Police Group Krzysztof J. and Bartłomiej K.,” the spokesman of the Regional Court in Szczecin, Tomasz Szaj, informed the Polish Press Agency at the end of July. “In the assessment of the second instance court, the evidence collected by the prosecutor does not allow the court to assume that there is a high probability that the suspects committed the acts they are accused of,” said Szaj. According to him, this means that no preventive measures can be used towards the suspects. He informed that the court in its written justification of the issued rulings referred in detail to the allegations made by the public prosecutor. “The rulings issued on Thursday are not subject to appeal,” Szaj stressed then.
“Inadmissible pressure on the court”
“For 40 I have not encountered such pressure on the court,” Włodzimierz Łyczywek, the dean of the District Bar Council in Szczecin comments on the actions of the prosecutor’s office. “If the prosecutor’s office initiates proceedings against the court which issues an unfavourable ruling in the case conducted by that prosecutor’s office, then I do not know what country we live in,” he expresses his outrage.
Lawyers mention not only the inadmissible attempt to influence the court, but also the fact that the prosecutor’s office itself is a party in the case, so it should remit the case to another town.
Michał Tomala from the Regional Court informed us that the Regional Court had requested the prosecutor’s office to confirm the information about the proceedings conducted against the judges. “In the event of an official confirmation of the fact that the proceedings are being conducted, the National Council of the Judiciary – which in accordance with art. 186.1 of the Constitution is the guardian of the independence of courts – will be immediately notified thereof.” wrote Tomala.
Źródło: tvn24.pl/tłumaczenie Intertext.com.pl
Źródło zdjęcia głównego: tvn24