The Supreme Administrative Court has dismissed the cassation appeal in a case stemming from the transfer of personal data from Poland’s PESEL register to Poczta Polska in April 2020, a move tied to planned postal elections in May 2020. The cassation challenge, brought against a ruling of the Provincial Administrative Court, asserted that the transfer was not valid or properly authorized. The higher court’s decision means the earlier ruling stands, and the attempt to overturn it through cassation has been rejected.
The online docket of the Supreme Administrative Court announced the ruling on a Wednesday, and the information was also shared by the Office for Personal Data Protection. This aligns with the February 2021 decision of the Warsaw Provincial Administrative Court and confirms that the cassation filed by Poczta Polska has not succeeded while the cassation from the Ministry of Digitalization was withdrawn.
The case traces its origins to actions taken by the state administration around the time of the May 2020 elections. The then Minister of Digitalization provided Poczta Polska with personal data from the PESEL register for Polish citizens turning 18 by May 10, 2020 and residing in Poland. The ministry explained that the data were stored on a password protected DVD and that the disk had been handed over after identity verification. The password was sent through a separate channel at the time.
The dataset included names, PESEL numbers, and in many cases current or last known registered addresses for permanent or temporary residence, reflecting what was available in the PESEL registry at the moment. The minister justified the action by noting that the transfer was requested by the Post Office and was executed under a legal framework designed to address exceptional circumstances. At the same time, officials acknowledged that data handling occurred in a way that did not involve the data subject directly entering a new process.
In May 2020, the Commissioner for Human Rights appealed to the administrative court over the operation. The provincial court later ruled that the act of transferring the data was ineffective, citing the lack of clear authority for the Post Office to conduct presidential elections by correspondence at that stage. The court emphasized that the Post Office did not have independent authority to organize such elections, and that the data handover should be considered defective in that context.
In its cassation filing, the Post Office argued that the provincial court had conducted an incorrect analysis and that voting by mail provisions were not yet in force at the time the data access request was made. The Ombudsman responded by stating that any transfer of data could be justified only under the specific law governing general elections, which was not in effect until May 9, 2020. As a result, the commissioner requested that the cassation appeal be dismissed.
The case is part of a broader set of administrative disputes related to the May 2020 postal voting plans. Earlier that year, a separate ruling by the Warsaw Provincial Administrative Court, following a complaint by the Commissioner for Human Rights, deemed certain government actions connected to postal voting as violating the law. The court argued that the Prime Minister had overstepped legal boundaries by directing Poczta Polska to prepare for presidential elections by post, a move judged inconsistent with constitutional and statutory requirements for organizing general elections. The judgment indicated that the relevant laws—and the Constitution—do not grant the Prime Minister the authority to oversee general elections by postal means. A final resolution on this separate cassation was still pending before the Supreme Court at the time of the ruling discussed here.
In December, parliament approved the creation of an investigative committee to examine the legality of the 2020 presidential elections conducted by postal voting. The committee began its work with witness hearings, signaling Parliament’s continued interest in the topic and its potential implications for future electoral processes.
Source notes and further context underscore how administrative remedies and constitutional safeguards intersect with emergency provisions during electoral operations. The outcome of the current cassation confirms the appellate court’s earlier assessment and preserves the integrity of the lower ruling in this matter.
tkwl/PAP
Source: wPolityce