Prosecutor's Office pursues Manowska: Historical request to waive immunity president of SN

The case of Małgorzata Manowska is 1 of the loudest topics of the day in Polish media. Its consequences can be far-reaching – not only for the First president of the ultimate Court itself, but besides for the architecture of the Polish justice system.

Margaret Manowska. photograph screen shot, youtube

On 16 July 2025, the National Prosecutor's Office filed 2 formal requests for the waiver of Manowska's immunity – as First president of the ultimate Court and president of the Court of State. This is the consequence of an investigation initiated in September 2024, after notifications submitted by, among others, members of the Court of State and attorneys of justice Paul Yushyn.

Applications were addressed in parallel to 2 bodies – the Chamber of Professional work of the ultimate Court and the Court of State. The second is simply a peculiar constitutional body that may justice those who have the highest functions in the state. Manowska, as justice and president of the Court, uses the alleged double immunity which protects her from being held accountable without the consent of both institutions.

This is the first case in the past of the 3rd Republic, erstwhile the prosecution requests the waiver of the immunity of the acting First president of the ultimate Court.

Charges against Manowska

The Prosecutor's Office intends to file 3 authoritative charges against Margaret Manowska. The first concerns the excess of allowances – As president of the SN College, she was to consider the 24 major resolutions taken between October 2021 and July 2022, even though there was no quorum. The silence of any of the members of the College was treated as a ‘abstention’ which allowed the adoption of resolutions.

The second plea refers to a failure to fulfil obligations “Manowska did not convene a sitting of the full composition of the Court of State, even though on 20 March 2024 six of its members made a formal request. The gathering was not held within the statutory 45-day time limit.

The 3rd plea concerns the failure of a final judgment. It is about the deficiency of publication on the SN website of information on the suspension of the suspension of justice Paul Yushyn, to which the Manowska order of the Olsztyn territory Court required. According to the prosecution, these actions were not accidental – they were informed administrative decisions.

Procedure for waiving immunity

Margaret Manowska is covered by double immunity – as a justice of the SN and the president of the Court of State. Two separate applications were so required. Only affirmative decisions by both institutions will enable formal prosecution.

A spokesperson for the National Prosecutor's Office, Przemysław Nowak, stressed that the decision to submit applications was only made after the SN completed the examination of the validity of parliamentary elections in order to avoid allegations of impact on the democratic process. The investigation itself has continued since September 2024 and is based on civic and organization notices.

Systemic context

Małgorzata Manowska was appointed president of the ultimate Court by president Andrzej Duda in May 2020. Earlier in 2007, she served as Undersecretary of State in the Ministry of Justice in the Government of Law and Justice erstwhile the ministry was headed by Zbigniew Ziobro. In fresh years, her name has been linked mainly to the controversial improvement of the judiciary implemented by the environment of the Minister of Justice.

Although her word of office does not end until 2026, critical voices have been heard for months – from both the judiciary and NGOs and European institutions. Current proposals can open the way to breaking the immunity of the highest judicial officers.

Voice in discussion

The case immediately sparked strong reactions. Justice Minister Adam Bodnar assured that the prosecution's actions were the consequence of concrete notifications, not part of a political game. The SN spokesperson Prof. Aleksander Stępkowski, who described the investigative actions as an effort to destabilise the judiciary, is rather different.

In the defence of Manowska, the association “Lawmakers for Poland” spoke, calling the case “the act of political terror”. In turn, justice Dorota Zabłudowska of Iustitia stated that "the Manowska case shows how far abuses have occurred inside the ultimate Court – not only legal, but ethical."

The Helsinki Human Rights Foundation called for “full transparency of procedures” and the avoidance of political force on judges investigating the case.

What's next?

Both applications - to the SN and to the Court of State - must be formally recognised. Although procedures do not have statutory deadlines, public force can velocity up decisions. If both organs agree, the D.A. can formally press charges.

More broadly, the substance may set a fresh standard of constitutional and authoritative responsibility. It is besides a test for judicial institutions – whether they are able to settle their own environment erstwhile not only regulations are at stake, but public trust.