The “caste” defends the judge who is lenient to the rioters who raided the church. There is a response from the president of the National Court Register: “Hysterical reaction”

The “caste” hysteria continues around the high-profile acquittal of the rioters who interrupted Holy Mass in October 2020. in Poznań Cathedral. Extremely politicized legal associations are collecting signatures in support of Judge Joanna Knobel, who ruled that the activists’ raid on the temple was not “evil.” Judge Dagmara Pawełczyk-Woicka, president of the National Council for the Judiciary, today spoke boldly about the shocking verdict and the political chutzpah surrounding it.

READ ALSO: They broke into the church, covered the altar with banners during Holy Mass, but the court acquitted them! Rode? “They didn’t do it maliciously”

Attack on the cathedral

In October 2020, activists associated with the Women’s Strike who broke into the temple did not care that a Holy Mass was held at the cathedral. By disrupting its course, they undermined the constitutional right to freely carry out religious practices. After the protest at the cathedral, the prosecutor’s office charged 32 people with “jointly and in concert maliciously obstructing the public performance of a religious act”. This act is punishable by a fine, restriction of freedom or imprisonment up to 2 years. The defendants pleaded not guilty. They didn’t have to, the court was on their side from the start. Interestingly enough, according to Judge Knobel, the disgusting provocation was not of a “malicious” nature.

No “malice”

Judge Joanna Knobel, in the grounds of the verdict, recalled that after the Constitutional Tribunal’s verdict, a wave of protests “spread across the country”. She pointed out that the evidence did not show the “maliciousness” of the protesters who wanted to express their displeasure with the Constitutional Tribunal’s ruling.

She added that the defendants protested while maintaining “seriousness and respect” for the place where they were staying, and moreover, they chose the time of the sermon for the duration of the protest. She also pointed out that the slogans on the banners brought by the protesters “did not incite hatred or attack religion in an offensive manner”.

“Caste” collects signatures

The “caste” of judges and insurgent prosecutors began collecting signatures in support of Judge Knobel, whose president of the court, Judge Dagmara Pawełczyk-Woicka, rightly suggested that he send the activist-friendly judge to training on issues related to the constitutional rights of believers.

The “caste”, enraged by the obvious reaction of the chairman of the National Judicial Council, intensified the attacks on the Council and its head. Today Judge Dagmara Pawełczyk-Woicka sent a special letter in this case. In it he recalls the duties of a judge and points out the shortcomings in the oral justification of Judge Knobel’s bizarre verdict.

I don’t know if the judge’s decision is correct in this particular case, but listening to the oral justification of the decision, I not only got the impression, but even confidence that the judge did not meet the requirements of objectivity and placed her beliefs above the law. From the formulation of the oral motives, it was possible to learn that the law of this particular group of believers should be considered undeserving protection because of “violation of the rights of women and the behavior of the hierarchs of the Church”

– we read in the letter from the president of the National Court Register.

I would like to remind you of the basic principle that it is essential for the judge to be impartial. Only then will the decision be considered fair, because the judge has maintained objectivity in the eyes of outside observers. (…) In settling a case, one should forget about the likes, dislikes or common world view that one may feel with one of the parties. If you can’t do that, you have to change your job

– emphasizes Judge Dagmara Pawełczyk-Woicka.

It is sad that some judges need to be reminded of the basic duties of a judge in a special letter. Politically heated representatives of the “caste” of judges think they can use the court as a political or ideological tool. This overt interference with judicial independence could not go unanswered.

UK