Andrzej Stępka (Chairman), Małgorzata Gierszon and Piotr Mirek (Rapporteur) – these are the judges who halted the closure of the case involving Mariusz Kamiński and other former heads of the CBA. The matter was sent back to the District Court for a fresh review. The question remains: who stands behind this move and the apparent setback in the legal process? Public discourse points to the composition of Supreme Court judges. Reports from wPolityce.pl suggest that among the three Supreme Court judges who weighed in on the case, two had previously acquitted Beata Sawicka, overturned sentences for a judge tied to criminal networks, and rejected the case involving Grzegorz Przemyk, casting doubt on the finality of that ruling.
READ ALSO: The Supreme Court is blind to the ruling of the Constitutional Tribunal! The case of Mariusz Kamiński and other former heads of the CBA was dropped
The chair of the panel assigned to review Mariusz Kamiński’s presidential pardon is SNN Andrzej Stępka. In 2014, Stępka sat on the bench that upheld the acquittal of Beata Sawicka, a former Civic Platform MP, and Mirosław Wądołowski, the mayor of Hel, in a high-profile corruption case.
A democratic state cannot test the honesty of its citizens or their susceptibility to crime. The agent should not create situations that foster strong emotional or personal ties with the person being provoked. He should not record conversations in private spaces, such as in a car, as happened in this instance.
Judge Andrzej Stępka delivered the verdict’s justification.
Still, this marks only a part of the controversial choices made by jurors, including judge Andrzej Stępka. In 2016, the Supreme Court, with Stępka on the jury, overturned a relatively minor sentence of a military judge charged with offenses not aligned with the seriousness of his duties. Public reporting notes that the retired judge L. faced a disciplinary tribunal for incidents described as 20 actions inconsistent with the dignity of the office. The Disciplinary Spokesperson of the Military Judiciary, Major Andrzej Wilczewski, alleged that Lieutenant Colonel L. sent notices to the Prosecutor General, the Chief of the Military Prosecutor, the Minister of Justice from July 2011 to August 2013, and to the Internal Security Agency about crimes involving more than one person. The communications implicated key figures in the military court, a secretariat employee, and a military prosecutor, touching on serious offenses, including participation in an armed criminal group.
Not cooperating?
In 2014 the Supreme Court, with Andrzej Stępka on the jury, held that being an informant for the SB did not amount to cooperation with the security services of the People’s Republic of Poland when the informant was aware of the relationship. The case involved a candidate for the Sejm who claimed not to be a conscious or covert employee of the security service of that era.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. Yet, in October 2014 the Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s decision. The grounds stated that contacts with the security service that involve passing along information about individuals aware of such ties do not meet the standard of cooperation with the security services of the People’s Republic of Poland.
– reported by lex.pl.
Another case in which Judge Andrzej Stępka appeared concerns a situation where the Supreme Court only issued a reprimand to Jacek K., a judge from the Sieradz District Court, for official misconduct. The justifications for verdicts were lengthy, with delays ranging from seven months to as long as 476 days. As a result, the Treasury Department had to pay compensation to individuals awaiting the reasons behind criminal judgments and unable to appeal for more than a year.
Przemyk’s case
Another judge who issued the pardon decision in Mariusz Kamiński’s case was SSN Małgorzata Gierszon. In July 2010, the Supreme Court, with her on the jury, ruled that the Grzegorz Przemyk death case was time-barred. The court rejected the cassation appeal against the final judgment and ended the case of a former riot police officer accused of fatally beating a high school student, due to the statute of limitations. The Court found the cassation appeal by the then Minister of Justice unfounded. The minister argued that the act committed by the officer was not time-barred and sought to overturn the stoppage and return the case to the court of second instance. The Supreme Court dismissed those arguments.
The authority of the judiciary and the rule of law rest on fair respect and consistent application.
– asserted Judge Małgorzata Gierszon in the verdict justification.
Today, the same judges who challenged the Constitutional Tribunal’s ruling presided over matters involving Ministers Maciej Wąsik and Mariusz Kamiński. This sequence illustrates ongoing concerns about perceived biases within the judiciary.