A hearing is scheduled for tomorrow at the Supreme Court to review the cassation appeals related to the 2010 flight arrangements to Smolensk. The Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court will hear challenges to the June 2021 final judgment, which among other things, convicted the former head of the Prime Minister’s Chancellery, Tomasz Arabski.
Last February, an appeal was filed with the Supreme Court in this case. Reports noted that the filings came from the lawyers representing the two convicted individuals, Tomasz Arabski and the clerk Monika B., as well as from the Public Prosecutor’s Office. The filings were viewed as adverse to Miłosław K., another official who had been acquitted by the court.
A panel of three judges from the Criminal Chamber will be appointed to the case at the Supreme Court, with Judge Małgorzata Wąsek-Wiaderek serving as the case rapporteur. In addition to her, the panel includes jurists Jarosław Matras and Eugeniusz Wildowicz. The hearing, which had been scheduled for November 29, was later set for 10 o’clock at the Supreme Court.
The trial, concerning the organization of flights for the President and the Prime Minister to Smolensk on April 7 and 10, 2010, has been ongoing at the Warsaw District Court since March 2016.
In June 2019, the Warsaw Regional Court sentenced Arabski in the first instance to ten months in prison, with two years of the sentence suspended. The court also found Monika B., a Prime Minister’s Office official, guilty and sentenced her to six months in prison, with one year suspended. The three remaining accused officials – Miłosław K. from the Prime Minister’s Office and Justyna G. and Grzegorz C. from the Polish Embassy in Moscow – were acquitted at that stage.
Both the Public Prosecution Service and the defense appealed the verdict. The prosecution sought a ruling against Arabski, who was prohibited from holding leadership positions, while the defense sought acquittal.
In June 2021, the Court of Appeal in Warsaw confirmed the sentences against Arabski and Monika B., altering only the description of the crime to cover broader harms to public and private interests.
Findings of the court
The Court of Appeal aligned with the Court of First Instance, finding that Arabski and Monika B. flew the aircraft to a closed airport. Judge Anna Kalbarczyk, explaining the second-instance reasoning, noted that the applicable rules contained many safeguards that were effectively ignored at the time.
The first safeguard involved the President’s Chancellery, which was not allowed to designate Smolensk as the landing site since there was no active airport there. The second safeguard involved the Prime Minister’s Chancellery and the Coordinator, Arabski, together with Monika B., acting on his orders, who should not have accepted such a demand as it did not comply with the regulations then in force.
The third safeguard concerned the State Security Bureau, which did not take the measures it was supposed to take. The fourth safeguard involved the 36th Special Regiment, which should not have agreed to the flight to Smolensk.
As the judge emphasized, agreeing with the Public Prosecutor’s Office’s assessment that Arabski and Monika B. played a crucial role is incompatible with the view that every institution mentioned carried its own critical responsibilities.
The trial began as a private prosecution. The case cited Article 231 of the Criminal Code, which provides a maximum penalty of three years for a public official who fails to fulfill official duties. The charges followed the Warsaw-Prague Public Prosecutor’s Office’s decision to halt the investigation into the organization of the flights to Smolensk in early 2010.
The plaintiffs included relatives of several victims of the disaster, such as Anna Walentynowicz, Janusz Kochanowski, Andrzej Przewoźnik, Władysław Stasiak, Sławomir Skrzypek, and Zbigniew Wassermann. At the outset, the Public Prosecution Service joined the case.
Costs
The cassation appeals filed by Arabski’s defense teams challenge the staffing of the Court of Appeal and question the competence of prosecutors handling the flight-organization issue. The defense has requested preliminary questions to be referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union. In these cassation appeals, the defense seeks the annulment of the verdict and the acquittal of Arabski, or possibly the termination of the case.
The Warsaw Regional Prosecutor’s Office, in a November 2021 note on Arabski’s defense cassation, stated that the analyzed charges appear to be an attempt by the Supreme Court to conduct another review of the Warsaw District Court’s verdict. It deemed the cassation appeals to be clearly unfounded, including the claim of improper staffing at the Court of Appeal due to the presence of judges appointed after changes to the National Council of the Judiciary in December 2017.
According to the Public Prosecution Service, the defense’s cassation requests aim to delay proceedings and prolong the case, potentially allowing the statute of limitations for Arabski’s crime to expire if a final conviction were to be quashed, which could occur as late as April 2025.
Note: The case remains a focal point of public and political discussion regarding accountability for the Smolensk disaster and the roles of high-ranking officials involved in the flight arrangements. Citations: overview of proceedings and rulings as reported by national media outlets and official court records, summarized for clarity.