It was expected to be a “accounting spell”. A amazing conclusion from the D.A. on the defendants Kamiński and Wąsik

Mariusz Kamiński and Maciej Wąsik, may avoid a trial planned in December concerning allegations of abuse of rights in the alleged land scandal. It is worth recalling that they were originally convicted by an incorrect sentence, but then president Andrzej Duda, in violation of the Constitution, decided to pardon them despite the fact that the formal conviction was not valid, that is, legally did not exist. Today, the prosecution itself draws attention to the court, arguing that the defendants enjoy immunity.

The deadline planned for the 12 December criminal trial for Michał Kamiński and Maciej Wąsik on the 2007 ground affair would be a symbolic “time of settlement” for a squad of politicians related to the fallen organization of the Law and Justice.

At least specified announcements came from a lawyer and a fresh associate of the Civic Coalition, Roman Giertych. As early as October, he reported that he would represent the individual affected in the case, namely a ministry authoritative who, according to the indictment, was the victim of illegal surveillance from the Central Anti-corruption Office (CBA). Gierty expressed hope that immediately after the trial, the defendants would be detained for punishment, as he stressed on social media.

However, there were doubts about the deadlines, which is due to the information available in Virtual Poland. The territory Attorney's Office in Rzeszów, the same 1 that had prepared the indictment, applied to the territory Court in Warsaw.

... to be referred by the court letters to the Marshal of the Sejm of the Republic of Poland to take a position on the exercise by the Sejm of the right to request the suspension of criminal proceedings against Mariusz Kamiński and Maciej Wąsik in connection with the election of the X-term MPs‘ – reads the case file.

The EPPO shall trust on Article 105(3). The Constitution states that "the proceedings initiated against a individual before the date on which he was elected shall be suspended at the request of the Sejm pending the expiry of the mandate".

Judge Anna Bator-Ciesielska, who is not part of the “elite” group of neo-KRS criminals, has already responded. ‘Please answer that (...) The Sejm will decide its own powers’ – it follows from the manual annotation in the executioners of the case.

‘Settlement time’

The HR portal, which first informed the case, decided to ask the D.A. why the D.A. decided to file specified a motion with the court? Answering this question, Krzysztof Ciechanowski, the spokesperson for the territory Attorney's Office in Rzeszów, informed the portal that the prosecution did not intend to comment on its own attitude on this issue.

The proposal has sparked controversy among lawyers who represent persons found injured in the course of the proceedings as a consequence of the activities of the Central Anti-corruption Office (CBA). Mr. Krzysztof Pawlak of Roman Giertych's law firm in Warsaw expressed his surprise, stating that it sounds like the prosecutor's office is on the side of the defendants. I miss the words," said the WP.

– We're analyzing the situation. I don't think the defendants can hide behind immunity. W There is simply a majority of the Sejm that can possibly vote with the agreement to hold Members responsible. I don't know if it's essential yet. – adds.

The rules supply for 3 options to resolve the issue of immunity of Members who are the subject of proceedings. The first option includes the suspension of the pending case until the end of the word of office, which would entail a four-year extension of the rights of 2 ministers.

The second option is to make a request for the Sejm's consent to bring criminal liability. The granting of consent requires an absolute majority, which means that the number of votes “for” must exceed the number of votes “against” and “resistent”. In utmost cases, 231 votes of support are needed.

The 3rd option is the voluntary consent of Members to proceed. At the moment, we have not received the position of the Kamiński and Wąsik ministers on this issue.

It is besides worth noting that, after each election, the lawyer General, Zbigniew Ziobro, has a work within 60 days of announcing the results of the election, to inform the Marshal of the Sejm of the results of the criminal proceedings against Members that were initiated before the date of the announcement. That deadline shall not expire until 17 December.

Marshal Simon Holovnia may not yet have information that the destiny of the 2 suspect ministers depends on him. We have so asked the Chancellery of the Sejm for information on the deadline for Members to deal with this matter.

We remind you that Mariusz Kamiński and Maciej Wąsik are accused of exceeding their powers in the context of the activities of the Central Anti-corruption Office in the alleged 2007 land scandal. Agents investigated the Ministry of Agriculture, then led by Andrzej Lepper, to analyse alleged corruption related to the decision to rotation off land in Mazury, which was to be possibly bribed by Andrzej Lepper, who was then a PiS coalition. Despite trying to provoke, there was no bribe.

Years later, the court found that the methods used, specified as paper forgery, wiretaps and initiating an action that was a "criminal predisposition test" with Lepper's associates, were illegal. As a result, Mariusz Kamiński and Maciej Wąsik were sentenced to 3 years imprisonment and were prohibited from taking public positions. The case went to the second instance of the court, but before it was decided the recently elected president Andrzej Duda in 2015 pardoned politicians in a way incompatible with the Constitution, which allowed them to execute crucial functions in the government created by the Law and Justice.

Later, the ultimate Court ruled that the law of grace could be applied only in the case of legally convicted persons, and Kamiński and Wąsik did not fulfil this condition. After many years of legal disputes, it was recognised that the case had to be reconsidered by the court, which was consistently insisted by Stanisław and Antonia Lepper (mother and brother politician) and 1 of the co-workers of the minister of the time who obtained the position of victims.