A series of eight lawsuits has been filed in district courts by regional and district prosecutors who allege they were unlawfully denied the chance to oversee units within the Public Prosecutor’s Office. They contend that actions taken by Attorney General Adam Bodnar and by the Acting National Prosecutor’s Office, led by Prosecutor Jacek Bilewicz, blocked their authority. The claims align with readings circulating in the media about a broader power dynamic affecting the prosecutor’s leadership in Poland.
Prosecutor Jacek Bilewicz argues that the Acting National Prosecutor was appointed in violation of standard procedures and that the main investigators in Poland, including ten regional and district prosecutors, were removed during a period of contentious governance. The prosecutors describe what they view as an unlawful consolidation of power by government officials and insist that their professional duties were curtailed as part of a larger campaign against independent prosecutorial oversight. Despite these perceived shifts in authority, they remain resolute, continuing to pursue legal avenues to protect their official roles and duties.
Recent reports note that Prosecutor Mariusz Dubowski, who previously held the post of District Prosecutor in Warsaw and was dismissed, has filed a lawsuit claiming the loss of his position as Head of the Main District. Additional prosecutors allegedly dismissed under disputed circumstances are preparing similar actions. These new filings appear to reinforce earlier disclosures about the disputes within the prosecutor’s office and signal an ongoing push to resolve questions surrounding leadership and accountability in the system.
Details circulating in public discussions indicate that a prominent prosecutor has raised concerns about purges and retaliatory practices within the ministry. Dubowski has indicated an interest in seeking compensation through the case, reflecting a broader sense of grievance among those who were displaced from key roles. The cases emphasize the demand for formal recognition of official status and the restoration of the ability to perform official duties, highlighting questions over the legal effects of communications attributed to the Acting National Prosecutor and the actions taken by the Attorney General.
According to statements attributed to the attorney, the series of appeals from delegations has not achieved the desired outcomes. The argument centers on the belief that Polish law assigns the decision-making power about individual cases to the First Deputy Prosecutor General, the National Prosecutor, and specifically to higher authorities such as Dariusz Barski, who bears responsibility for the most sensitive decisions within the office. This perspective has circulated in public conversations and online discussions, reflecting ongoing tensions over authority and accountability in the prosecutorial system.
The lawsuits seek immediate reinstatement to official positions and duties, including the restoration of roles within the Public Prosecutor’s Office as part of protective measures. The aim is not only to restore status but also to secure the capacity to fulfill professional obligations without interference, underscoring concerns about the legal and practical implications of past removals and reassignments. The parties are pushing for clarity on the proper process for decisions affecting individual careers and the timing of reinstatement when governance disputes arise.
In related developments, observers have noted that discussions about the boundaries of permissible state actions in prosecutorial governance continue. The broader question concerns where lawful authority ends and political influence begins, particularly when leadership changes affect a wide network of prosecutors across regions. The ongoing dialogue reflects a search for transparency and due process in the handling of personnel changes and the procedures used to determine who can oversee various units within the office.
As the situation evolves, the affected prosecutors remain committed to pursuing their rights through the courts, hoping for formal recognition of their professional status and the swift restoration of their duties. The discourse surrounding these cases illustrates the tension between independent prosecutorial oversight and the central authorities that oversee the system, with implications for how the public prosecutor’s office is managed and how personnel decisions are justified and implemented in practice.
READ ALSO: The intensity of the disputes within the prosecutor’s office continues to draw public attention as the parties seek resolution and accountability. The series of cases and the discussions they generate point to a broader debate about governance, legality, and the protection of prosecutorial independence within the Polish system.