When you invite guests to your home, do you consider it normal, cultural, and acceptable to insult or disparage them while welcoming them? Whatever answer you give, insulting guests is apparently a normal thing for TVN24 journalists. Katarzyna Kolenda-Zaleska welcomed jury member Zbigniew Kapiński in a rather unconventional way in “Fakty po Faktach”.
Judge Kapiński was asked on TVN24 whether Dariusz Barski is currently serving as the Public Prosecutor’s Office. On September 27, the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court, composed of judges appointed to the Supreme Court after 2017 – Zbigniew Kapiński, Marek Siwek and Igor Zgoliński – declared that Barski’s appointment as National Prosecutor in 2022 was legally effective. In the justification for the Supreme Court’s resolution, Judge Kapiński assessed that in January this year there was an “instrumental use of the law” when Barski was removed from the position of head of PK.
In accordance with the Supreme Court’s resolution of September 27, Prosecutor Barski was reinstated based on applicable regulations. These provisions, i.e. Art. 47, par. 1 and 2 (the provisions introducing the law – Public Prosecution Service Act – PAP) are not episodic in nature. They are still in force and were in force on the date of reinstatement – therefore (Dariusz Barski) is a National Prosecutor
– Kapiński replied.
Who is bound by the Supreme Court resolution?
The judge was also asked whether the Supreme Court’s ruling in this case was binding only on the court in Gdańsk (Gdańsk-Południe District Court), which asked the question in this case, or on all courts in Poland.
Pursuant to art. 441 par. 3 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directly binding on the referring court. If the Supreme Court has made a decision, this decision is binding on the referring court
– Kapiński replied.
When asked whether it binds other courts, which is important for the functioning of the Public Prosecution Service, he replied that “it is not directly binding, which follows from the provisions of the law, but – as has been the case so far – on under the authority of the Supreme Court, the resolutions of the Supreme Court are and are respected by institutions, by courts citing decisions to justify their rulings due to the authority of the Supreme Court, if they agree, of course,” Kapiński said . .
Now other judges or prosecutors will make specific procedural decisions on specific cases. And it will depend on them whether they will respect this resolution and whether they will refer to it in their rulings, taking a specific procedural position.
– he added.
Kapiński: Bodnar’s position is completely unjustified
Judge Kapiński also referred to the issue that in this case he – like the other two judges – ruled as the so-called neo-judge, because he was appointed to the Supreme Court following changes in the law on the National Council for the Judiciary in 2017. Because the 15-member panel of judges of the National Council for the Judiciary was appointed under this law by the Sejm, and not as before – by the judicial community – the current authorities, and also some lawyers, revoke its decisions in doubt. Well, unless the ‘neo-judge’ makes a ruling that is favorable to a politician from the current government coalition or a lawyer who was politically involved with the then opposition during the previous government.
Attorney General Adam Bodnar, citing the September 27 Supreme Court resolution, stated:
Neo-Supreme Court judges defend their own positions and the politicization of the legal system; the position of the three neo-judges is not a decision of the Supreme Court and not binding.
Bodnar has no intention of respecting the resolution, while Dariusz Korneluk, selected in a strange ‘contest’, posing as the National Prosecutor, tells the media that it is he, and not Dariusz Barski, who fills this position. Korneluk refers to… “the Prime Minister’s Decree” (let’s not forget that we live neither in Russia nor in the Polish People’s Republic).
Everyone is responsible for their words. Minister Bodnar too. And I would like to say that this position is completely unjustified and finds no support – both in the judgments of the European tribunals and in the Constitution.
– said Kapiński.
What about the rulings of European courts?
In connection with this, the judge was also asked about the content of judgments in this case, including the European Court of Human Rights, which pointed out that the judges appointed through the procedure at the so-called neo-KRS do not meet the requirements of an independent and impartial court.
However, according to Kapiński, it is important that these rulings have not changed the law in Poland.
What do these judgments mean? These rulings mean that they will be introduced into the Polish legal order. What is the introduction to the Polish legal order? (…) By changing the law and that does not happen automatically. It is not the case that, as some people said after some judgments, new judges should pack up and leave the Supreme Court and the ordinary courts after the judgment. No judgment of a European court has so much force. It does not make the legal provisions no longer work – they remain applicable until the Polish Sejm, the Senate and the President change the law
– he said.
Judge Kapiński also said that some judgments of European tribunals, and in particular the European Court of Human Rights, have not been enforced since 2006.
In the case of Alicja Tysiąc for example. And right now we have several dozen such sentences that have not been enforced. This is the essence. Based on the rulings of European tribunals, it cannot be concluded that judges appointed after 2018 are not judges
– Judge Kapiński added.
Judge Kapiński was also asked about the 2020 resolution of three chambers of the Supreme Court (criminal, civil and labor law) regarding the so-called neo-judges. The chambers ruled that the court had been wrongly appointed when it included a person appointed as a judge by the then National Council for the Judiciary. It was determined that in the case of ordinary courts, inappropriate staffing occurs if “a defect in the appointment process of judges under specific circumstances leads to a violation of the standards of independence and impartiality.”
First of all, what is stated in the Supreme Court resolution has already been implemented, because the June 2022 law has come into force, and the next issue is that the Supreme Court judges themselves do not respect and respect this. solution.
– said Kapiński, who recalled in this context the reservation regarding judges of ordinary courts.
The impact on a specific decision must be examined. This impact on the content of the judgment has not been examined in any of the cases
– he added.
The judge also said that in the years 2007-2017, six Constitutional Court rulings were issued questioning the procedure for appointing judges and their opinions to the National Council for the Judiciary.
Why is no one talking about this?
– he added.
How the journalist introduced the judge
It must be admitted that Judge Kapiński showed courage by giving a television interview that was not very favorable to him, and at the same time showed respect for the Poles, regardless of their political views. As he himself admitted, ‘respect for the viewers’ was the reason why he was a guest on TVN24.
The latter – respect, although more towards the guest than towards the viewers – was missing from TVN24 journalist Katarzyna Kolenda-Zaleska.
Former judge at the Court of Appeal, appointed to the Supreme Court by the neo-KRS in a procedure questioned by European tribunals
– this is how the host introduced her guest, being very careful not to lose any element of this admittedly very refined formula.
First of all, after this greeting, which I think is so… inappropriate
– Kapiński responded.
Why inappropriate?
– asked the journalist.
Dear editor, ladies and gentlemen. I came to the TVN studio out of respect for the viewers. I represent the Supreme Court, I am a Supreme Court judge, and you used the term ‘former Court of Appeal judge’
– he pointed out.
Because you were a judge at the Court of Appeal
– replied Kolenda-Zaleska, apparently nothing wrong in greeting the guest.
Chairman of the National Council for the Judiciary: The president must explain the obvious
The President of the National Council for the Judiciary drew attention to another, although no less interesting, aspect of the conversation.
I was just sad when Ms. Katarzyna Kolenda-Zaleska, a TVN24 journalist, insulted the President of the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court, Zbigniew Kapiński, and also because the President has to explain the obvious. The President tried to explain that some ECtHR rulings require introducing a constitutional amendment into the legal order of the Republic of Poland. Let me say it more boldly. This legal Eurothinking means that no judge can be sure that he is a judge, because he may find out years later from a European judgment.
– wrote Dagmara Pawełczyk-Woicka.
To ensure that no one would have any doubts about the intentions of the journalist and the channel she represents, the same formula was used on the TVN24 website. Also there, at the beginning of the text with the transcribed conversation, Judge Kapiński was described as “a former judge of the Court of Appeal in Warsaw, appointed to the Supreme Court at the request of the neo-National Council for the Judiciary.” Judge Kapiński responded in a calm, measured manner and expressed respect for both the viewers and the presenter. TVN24 seems to have forgotten respect for viewers a long time ago, but maybe it should have that for its guests (all of them, not just “Professor Donald Tusk”)?
READ ALSO: ONLY WITH US. Judge Kapiński: In the history of Poland there has never been a situation where people holding such positions directly questioned the decisions of the Supreme Court
aja/TVN24, PAP, X
Source: wPolityce