The Krakow arrangement is closed in the justice strategy controlled by the Law and Justice. Aggravating ultimate Court ruling

As a consequence of a test of independency of 1 of the Krakow recently appointed judges, The ultimate Court established the existence of an arrangement of judges in the Krakow court, which was created during the regulation of the PiS Party.

The full incidental came to light in the context of the criminal trial which took place before the courts in Wadowice and Kraków. The sentenced individual in this trial filed a cassation with the ultimate Court and raised doubts as to the impartiality of neo-judges Jędrzej Dessoulavy-Sliwiński, who was in the Board of Appeal of the territory Court in Krakow. Jędrzej Dessoulavy-Sliwiński, being a neo-judge, rapidly advanced in the hierarchy of the Krakow court during the period of the chairmanship of the demoralized Dagmara Pawełczyk-Woiczka, who presides over the illegal and politicized neoKRS.

The ultimate Court carried out a test of independency and impartiality of Dessoulavy-Sliwiński and stated that it did not meet the requirements of impartiality and independence. Consequently, the judgement was wrongly annulled.

However, it is more crucial to discover what the ultimate Court has done by examining the career of a justice in fresh years. The ruling of the SN reveals an image of the arrangement which was created in the Kraków court during the chairmanship of Dagmara Pawełczyk-Woicki, aimed at speeding up Dessoulavy-Sliwiński's career. The delegation to the Krakow territory Court began with acquaintances. Dessoulavy-Sliwiński was then a territory neojudge in Bydgoszcz and for respective months (between April 2018 and June 2019) worked on a delegation at the Ministry of Justice. It is worth noting that he worked in the department headed by Dariusz Pawłyszcz, a life partner of Dagmara Pawełczyk-Woicka, who was the president of the territory Court in Krakow and became the “chairman” of the illegal and politicized National Judicial Council in 2022.

From the information gathered by the ultimate Court during the test, Pawłyszcz informed his partner about the willingness of the justice to accept a delegation in the territory court in Krakow.

"This results from the minutes of the gathering of the College of the territory Court in Krakow of 17 May 2021. The information obtained in the course of the College's deliberations besides revealed that the proposal to delegate to justice in the territory Court in Krakow was not submitted to the judges of the regional courts ruling in that district, and there were no another candidates from Poland," the ultimate Court states in its justification for the ruling. The application for a delegation of the neo justice was filed on 28 September 2020 and was already on delegation from 1 November. And despite the negative opinion of the president of the Bydgoszcz territory court, where Dessoulavy-Sliwiński ruled.

Shortly after this, the neojudge decided to rise his illegal position and apply for the position of a "judge" territory court in the Krakow territory Court. In the same competition, he besides submitted his candidacy to an lawyer with a PhD in legal science, who practiced in the Kraków territory for 8 years.

An opinion was required to measure the candidates. In the case of Dessoulavy-Sliwiński, the ‘president’ of the territory court commissioned this assessment to the territory neojudge Dariusz Stachursek, as the ultimate Court had decided. Importantly, for neo-Judge Stachurski it was the first specified opinion he had to make for a candidate to the territory Court. The ultimate Court notes in its ruling that this is peculiarly surprising, especially since at that time 2 visitors were available in the territory court, who were besides required to draw up opinions on candidates and were not then burdened with much work. The ultimate Court so expresses its doubts and reservations.

“The question is immediately raised whether the competent individual to measure the qualifications of a candidate for a territory court is simply a justice who does not regulation in that court, and so is not qualified to justice (without a delegation) in a territory court on the date of his opinion,” he states in his justification the composition of the SN and states that Stachurski “has never previously issued an opinion on a candidate for a territory court, and nevertheless was given specified an order.”

Stachurski's assessment was positive. The opinion's author stated that the candidate under examination has the right predispositions to service as a ‘district judge’ and deserves this nomination. During the gathering of the College of the territory Court, which was to decide whether to support the candidacy of Śliwiński, the “President” of the territory Court of Dagmara Pawliczyk-Woic asked whether this was the first opinion prepared by Stachurski. Pawełczyk-Woicka replied that she was not sure, although, as the ultimate Court notes, this could be easy verified by asking the independent author of the opinion. In the final analysis, the College supported the Śliwinski candidacy with 1 voice advantage, despite the fact that another lawyer competing with him was assessed as a very competent candidate for the position of justice of the territory court.

Demoralized legally Dagmara Pawełczyk-Woicka spoke. "Personally curious in promoting candidate"

As a last resort, the nomination decision was passed on to the recently created Constitution of the National Judicial Council (neo-KRS). The evaluation of both candidates was conducted by a three-member squad of neo-KRS members on 13 July 2021 and recommended a lawyer for the position of judge. erstwhile the squad typical presented his conclusions during the neo-KRS meeting, Dagmar Pawełczyk-Woick, who was then a associate of the politicized National Judicial Council and was inactive the president of SO in Krakow, took the floor.

‘She concluded that in her opinion the Council should follow applicable skills and applicable experience and that the justice had proven himself in Division IV of the Criminal Appeals [there was posted at her request],’ she points out in the justification of the SN.

The consequence of the decision of an illegal body, whose predominant legally demoralized Dagmara Pawełczyk-Woicka was the advice of Dessoulavy-Sliwiński to the position of neojudge to SO in Krakow. The judges of the ultimate Court clearly state that the minutes of the vote do not indicate that anyone excluded from the vote, in peculiar the “president” of the Krakow territory court. For them, there is no uncertainty that the erstwhile circumstances relating to the delegation of Dessoulavy-Sliwiński to the territory Court in Krakow, including its receipt through work at the Ministry of Justice and cognition with Dariusz Pavłyszcza, as well as the order to draw up a qualifying opinion to the territory court's nosier, who had never done so before (and who besides signed letters of support for candidates for neo-KRS), clearly show that Dagmara Pawełczyk-Woicka personally sought to support only this candidate, even though he had a weaker qualifying assessment and deficiency of approval of the KRS team. Interestingly, in the resolution of the candidacy of the Krakow judge, it was written that the opinions in his case were drawn up by the territory court's visiting officer, although neo-judge Dariusz Stachurski did not execute this function at the time, which was besides noted by the ultimate Court.

On 11 October 2021, Jędrzej Dessoulavy-Sliwiński took the position of neojudge of the territory Court in Krakow. However, his career did not end there because, as the ultimate Court notes, in July 2020 he became a deputy disciplinary spokesperson for judges at the territory Court in Krakow (for a four-year term), and little than a year after his appointment as a territory neojudge, in September 2022, he was posted to the Court of Appeals in Krakow.

Mutual support in neo-KRS letters

There is another interesting aspect in this full case that has shed light on the full process. Both neo-judge Jędrzej Dessoulavy-Sliwiński and Dariusz Stachurski signed on the lists of support for a candidacy demoralized legally Dagmara Pawełczyk-Woicki for a second word in the neo-KRS. Not only did they support her, but they besides signed on the list of Krystyna Morawy-Fryzlewicz, president of the territory Court in Nowy Targ, who in turn supported Dagmara Pawełczyk-Woiczka, and this 1 in turn supported Moravia-Fryzlewicz.

Both neojudges besides gave their support to the candidacy of Irena Bochniak as a neo-KRS member. Irena Bochniak became the “Vicepress” of the Kraków territory Court during the regulation of the PiS Party. In this case, Irena Bochniak besides supported the candidacy of Dagmara Pawełczyk-Woicka, and she thanked her support on the list. In these letters, the ultimate Court notes, there is no date of signature, so it is impossible to clearly find erstwhile this was supported. However, the recruitment continued since December 2021.

"It is hard not to get the impression that there was a closed ellipse of people supporting certain people to the KRS (often the same ones) who, in parallel or immediately afterwards, will be promoted to the judicial and judicial hierarchy from the area of the territory Court of Krakow" - the ultimate Court stated in its justification.

In addition, ‘The granting of support to respective people to the KRS, which has not been in charge of the independency and independency of judges since 2018 (such assessments are besides presented in the case law not only of the SN, but besides of the ETPC and the TEU) is simply a clear proof of the approval of this ‘judge’ [Jędrzej Dessoulavy-Sliwiński] specified form of the KRS and at the same time its association with the executive power, since specified a composition of the National Judicial Council has been shaped by the political authority ruling in Poland since 2015’.

Repealed punishment for the demoralized neo-KRS

Neossiery Jędrzej Dessoulavy-Sliwiński was active in another case related to Dagmara Pawełczyk-Woiczka. At the end of last year, a schoolmate Zbigniew Ziobry, presently the president of the politicized and illegally functioning National Judicial Council, avoided paying a fine of PLN 3,000 imposed on her by the Krakow court. This punishment was due to the refusal of it to forward papers related to the appointment of the ‘judge’ who conducted the proceedings at first instance. This case was dealt with by the appeal department of the Krakow territory Court. The referee, Wojciech Maczuga, sought to conduct an independency test of the justice who oversaw the case at first instance and who during the regulation of the PiS organization was promoted significantly.

Immediately after the imposition of the punishment on Pawełczyk-Woiczka, there was an unexpected change in the composition of the judges who dealt with the case. 2 judges, Rafał Lisak and Margaret Fronc, who had previously been part of the ruling lineup, abruptly applied for leave on request on the day of the next trial. They were replaced by 2 "judges" on-calls associated with the Ziobry ministry, who voted in favour of repealing the punishment for Pawełczyk-Woick despite the opposition of justice Maczugi. 1 of these neo-judges was Jędrzej Dessoulavy-Sliwiński, who, along with another fresh judge, co-opted for the composition, voted to repeal the punishment in favour of Pawełczyk-Woick despite the different position of justice Maczugi.

This is the way a court, closed in the Polish dimension of the case, works where citizens study with different probles and number on justice.