Claims appearing in the media about the National Broadcasting Council’s allegedly illegal activities, used as a tool for political struggle, are not only unfounded, but downright false and disinformation – according to a statement posted on the National Broadcasting Council website on Wednesday has been published. .
The National Broadcasting Council operates within the limits of the law, including the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, the Broadcasting Act and the License Fee Act. When it comes to the settlement of obligations, it also applies the provisions of the Civil Code and the Code of Civil Procedure.
– we read in a statement to PAP from Teresa Brykczyńska, spokeswoman for the National Broadcasting Council.
It was emphasized that “the claim of Prof Romanowski, allegedly based on the article to which he referred. 213 section 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland +KRRiT therefore has no powers to assess whether the Minister of Culture had the right to appointing the members of the public radio and television broadcasting boards and liquidating them + is not true.
This provision authorizes the National Broadcasting Council to act and report violations of specific legal provisions – including the inadequacy of the minister’s actions, the invalidity of decisions and the related working methods of public radio and television broadcasters, and finally, the disability of company directors. appointed to circumvent the Broadcasting Act in the form of ‘liquidators’
– explained.
It was noted that “contrary to Prof. Romanowski’s assertions, the company’s statute does not provide an independent basis for opening a liquidation.
It is clear that the content of a hierarchically higher standard (i.e. the legal standard) cannot be subordinated to a hierarchically lower standard (i.e. the company’s statute). When determining the standard at a lower level, the content of the standards at a higher level must be taken into account
– emphasized in the announcement.
As noted, “the above-mentioned provision of the statute could only apply following a change in the generally applicable law, for example, following the entry into force of a law ordering the liquidation of public broadcasting companies.”
Until then, such a provision in the law is unenforceable
– rated.
Contrary to Prof. Romanowski’s claims, the National Broadcasting Council does not keep the subscription money at its disposal, but deposits the payment for each of the companies in a judicial deposit so that these funds can be collected by persons authorized to represent them
– explained.
Article 467 of the Civil Code provides for the possibility of such an action by any person without exception (including the Ministry of Finance) “if, due to circumstances for which he is not responsible, he does not know who the creditor is” or “if the creditor does not have full legal capacity or does not have a representative authorized to accept the benefit” or “if a dispute arises as to who the creditor is” or “if due to other circumstances relating to the person of the creditor the performance cannot be performed”
– we read in the announcement of the National Broadcasting Council.
As explained: “the legal chaos and the double voice in the public media resulting from the actions of the Minister of Culture and National Heritage and the related doubts about the persons managing the affairs of the companies, give the National Broadcasting Council the right to direct the benefits of a judicial deposit for collection by the companies.”
Ultimately, since, as Prof. Romanowski – The National Broadcasting Council reportedly has no right to question the consent of individuals representing public radio and television broadcasters. It is not the National Council that will assess the validity of the consent of a person applying to transfer money to a court surety, but the judicial authority
– it was written.
It was emphasized that “the accusation that the National Broadcasting Council has not shown any interest in the issue of regulating a situation found by the Constitutional Tribunal to be contrary to the Constitution since 2016, i.e. since the ruling of the Constitutional Court , is completely unjustified.” misplaced and unjustified.”
It should be remembered that the legislature did not provide for a legislative initiative for the constitutional body: the National Broadcasting Council.
– explained.
The accusation is false
This is yet another false accusation that misinforms the public
– highlighted in the National Broadcasting Council announcement.
In its announcement, the National Broadcasting Council referred to the accusations made by Prof. Michał Romanowski of the University of Warsaw, a lawyer from the law firm Romanowski i Wspólnicy, in an interview with the Polish Press Agency published on February 13.
In an interview with PAP, Prof. Michał Romanowski stressed that “the action of the National Broadcasting Council is completely illegal.”
The Council can only act on the basis and within the limits of the law, in accordance with Art. 7 of the Constitution, i.e. the principle of legalism, and its powers derive from Art. 213 section 1 of the Constitution, i.e. it must guarantee the freedom and pluralism of public radio and television broadcasters in the public interest
– he explained.
Therefore, the National Broadcasting Council has no authority to assess whether the Minister of Culture had the right to appoint the members of the public radio and television broadcasting councils and to liquidate them.
– added.
The National Broadcasting Council also left out the resolution adopted by a panel of seven Supreme Court justices in 2013, which has the force of a legal principle. It regulates the situation in which there is a dispute about an entry in the register and determines that decisions of the General Meeting of Shareholders are valid until a final court ruling.
– argued Prof. Romanowski.
In addition, the articles of association of public radio and television broadcasters, from the moment they were established, contain provisions approved by the registration court providing for the liquidation
– he explained.
He recalled that “the National Broadcasting Council has not been interested in the issue of regulating a situation found unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court since 2016, that is, since the judgment of the Constitutional Court.” “The only body given the power under the law to shape the authorities of public radio and television broadcasters was the National Media Council,” he added.
The lawyer also referred to the decision of the National Broadcasting Council to transfer money from subscription fees to a judicial deposit.
The solution proposed by the National Broadcasting Council has no legal basis, because the filing of a court fee is regulated in art. 467 of the Civil Code. The provision states that a benefit in favor of someone else will be placed in a court deposit if we do not know who the creditor is or if we do not know the address or place of business of the creditor. We know all the necessary information for public television and radio broadcasts. We also cannot talk about the lack of legal capacity or the absence of a representative authorized to accept the benefit
– he explained.
In my opinion, the conditions under which the court can accept these funds in its deposit have not been met. The court is not a bank that accepts such benefits at the request of anyone. However, the very fact of such an announcement proves that the National Broadcasting Council feels indebted to the public radio and television broadcasters.
– he said.
Therefore, this kind of action by the National Broadcasting Council is completely illegal and an instrument of political struggle. This is even more egregious than the actions of the National Broadcasting Council (KRRiT) aimed at preventing the renewal of TVN’s license.
– emphasized Prof. Michał Romanowski.
READ ALSO: Has Sienkiewicz achieved his goal? The court in Lublin decided to enter the opening of the liquidation of the Polskie Radio company in the register of entrepreneurs
mly/PAP
Source: wPolityce