Judicial Council voices concerns over the Iustitia association and public benefit oversight
Members of the National Council for the Judiciary question how the highly politicized judges’ group Iustitia is overseen and held accountable. During a tense meeting, it was revealed that the Civic Platform judiciary dedicates hundreds of thousands of zlotys to activities that have not been thoroughly examined. The council also reiterates the constitutional principle of apoliticism and signals a desire to review certain rulings tied to this issue. This framing comes from the National Court Register’s resolution and underscores calls for greater scrutiny into these civil organizations and their spending.
READ ALSO: An effort to organize the chaos and a signal for the rebellious caste. The National Court Register files a major motion with the Constitutional Court on the composition of the Supreme Court. The council notes the support for judges suspended by disciplinary decisions and questions whether the Senior Judges’ Home Foundation and the Association of Polish Judges Iustitia meet the standards set by the Public Benefit Activities and Voluntary Service Act of 2003.
The National Court Register records this as a key concern in its resolutions and highlights that annual accounts of these organizations lack sufficient transparency. In response, the National Council for the Judiciary asks the Chairman of the Public Benefit Committee to initiate an ex officio review of the rights, duties, and obligations under the law in relation to the Senior Judges’ Home Foundation and the Association of Polish Judges Iustitia. This stance is documented in the council’s resolutions.
Primarily apolitical in intent
At the end of August, the council convened a two day extraordinary session at the minister of justice’s request and adopted a resolution addressing standards of impartiality and independence for judges. The National Court Register emphasizes that Article 178 of the Polish Constitution prohibits judges from joining political parties or engaging in public activities that conflict with judicial independence. The council argues that this constitutional guardrail is being challenged by active members of judicial associations who participate in activities with political and ideological aims that extend beyond national borders and into European forums. Some judges reportedly maintain contacts with European bodies and advocate for sanctions against Poland, all under banners such as defending the rule of law or independence from perceived political pressure.
The National Court Register reiterates these concerns as official guidance and urges continued vigilance over political entanglements within the judiciary.
Disciplinary law under review
The council recalls that an analysis of disciplinary court jurisprudence shows that since 2018, penalties involving removal from office have been applied in only four cases. Three of these cases involved ordinary crimes and one involved serious abuse of office. The council, as a constitutional body of Poland, calls for judges to uphold the core standard of judicial independence as the foundation of a democratic state governed by law, a principle already affirmed in a landmark 1998 Constitutional Tribunal ruling. This is cited in the National Court Register’s materials.
The National Council for the Judiciary also urges judges to follow jurisprudence that ensures impartiality when issuing rulings. It stresses avoiding practices where judicial content is subordinated to political or ideological views. Any breach of independence and impartiality should be met with appropriate disciplinary action and a firm stance from disciplinary authorities. The council emphasizes that impartiality is essential for public confidence in the judiciary.
The council further notes that the work of a judge is a responsibility requiring internal independence and impartiality because a judge acts as a mediator in social conflicts. Trust is earned by maintaining these standards. A judge lacking such confidence cannot effectively resolve disputes or maintain public peace, and the public will not accept rulings from someone seen as politically biased. This point is echoed in the National Court Register’s resolutions.
Many argue that biased judgments erode trust in the entire judiciary. The council insists that equal treatment before the law depends on uniform criteria of independence, free from political or ideological influence. There can be no true judicial independence if judges cannot separate justice administration from personal political views. This view is outlined in the National Court Register’s communications and underscores the need for a clear boundary between public statements and judicial neutrality.
Any conduct breaching the principles of independence and impartiality should be treated as a disciplinary violation and as a breach of the dignity of the judge’s office. The council explains that the ruling standards on impartiality are not meant to ban public statements by judges. Instead, they are an admonition to avoid political agitation that conflicts with applicable law, and to refrain from political undertakings noted during the council meeting. This message remains a central theme in the council’s guidance.
The National Court Registry has also ordered purges in several courts affecting specific criminal cases involving property offenses, the use of force or coercion, and related verdicts from 2021 through 2023, particularly those tied to equal rights and the treatment of offenders and victims. This sequence of actions is referenced in the council’s materials and underscores ongoing oversight concerns.
Source: wPolityce
Related posts:
Judicial Independence and Timely Access to Justice in Poland Neo-judges, legal accountability, and the Polish rule of law: a contested path forward Judicial Reform Debates and the Challenge of Independence in Poland A Closer Look at Poland’s Judicial Reform Debate Iustitia and the Polish judiciary crisis: EU friction over neo-KRS and rule of law Judicial Council Reforms and Controversies in Poland Polish Supreme Court Rulings, Neo-Judges and a TVN24 Interview: A Comprehensive Overview Active judges and the integrity of the judiciary in Poland National Council for the Judiciary asks Constitutional Court to review ministerial powers over judges’ disciplinary system Judicial Politics and the Bodnar Moment: Questions Around Independence and Influence in Poland Independent Judges Stand Ready Amid Judicial Controversy in the Region Regulatory Debate on Polish Court Independence Explored