The Warsaw court ruled on the choice of envelopes. There's quite a few indications that..

The territory Court in Warsaw issued on Wednesday a resolution on the question of the alleged "envelope elections", which never took place, despite the fact that crucial funds were spent on their alleged organisation from the pockets of Polish taxpayers. This decision was taken by the Court after a case was examined in which the prosecution, in accordance with the announcement of the ultimate Chamber of Control, failed to investigate. Unfortunately, for the moment, the ruling's composition is not known in order to measure its ability to issue this ruling and to exclude politicised action. However, on the basis of the message of reasons, there is much evidence that it was issued by a politicized band of criminals in togas, who are nominated on the basis of a defective vocation derived from an illegal and politicized neoKRS.

The order of the territory Court for Warsaw – Śródmieście afraid the decision of the territory Prosecutor's Office in Warsaw, which refused to initiate an investigation into the notification made by the ultimate Chamber of Control on 30 December 2021.

The court maintained the decision of the prosecution, which refused to launch an investigation into the excess of powers by the Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki, Minister of State Acts Jack Sasin and another officials from the Prime Minister's office. The allegations afraid actions of 16 April 2020, erstwhile administrative decisions were taken ordering Poczcie Polska S.A. and the Polish safety Printing Works to take action to "against COVID-19". In practice, this meant preparing and conducting presidential elections in Poland by correspondence.

The explanatory memorandum states that "the prosecutor analysed in item the circumstances set out in the notification of the offence filed by the ultimate Audit Office, which questioned the compatibility of the appointed decisions with the rules of law mostly in force, including the Act of 2 March 2020 on circumstantial solutions related to the prevention, prevention and eradication of COVID-19 and another infectious diseases and the resulting crises, and the Act of 5 January 2011 Electoral Code".

In the Court’s view, ‘in the present case, in assessing the motives for public officials’ activities in relation to the issue, it is essential to take into account that due to the epidemiological situation caused by the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the holding of presidential elections in a conventional way, resulting in the gathering of voters at polling stations, with a very advanced probability, would entail an increase in infections among citizens wishing to fulfil their electoral obligation’.

The ruling composition (maybe made up of neo-Judges) besides agreed with the position of the Ziobrian prosecutor, who claimed that "in mid-April 2020 there were no known health, social and economical effects of the "COVID-19" pandemic".

Despite the fact that the alleged "envelope election" was yet not carried out, an amount akin to PLN 70 million was spent on them, coming from the wallets of Poles. The elections themselves were later held in conventional form, and the "killing virus" lost its "danger", at least for that moment.

According to the evaluation of the ultimate Chamber of Control, the organisation and preparation of the envelope elections on the basis of the administrative decision was without legal legitimacy of the foundation. According to the House's findings, there were no legal grounds for authorising the Prime Minister of the Warsaw Government, Morawiecki, to issue any instructions regarding preparations for elections.

– During this period, the Electoral Code Act was in force. This bill established the bodies liable for organising elections – emphasized Bogdan Skwarka from NIK.

On this basis, our earlier claim that this ruling was issued by a politicized band of criminals who, on the basis of defective nominations, consider themselves judges. If our presumption is actual in this respect, the ruling is worth as much as the full criminal neoKRS and the nominations of these pathodegenerates impersonating the court.

We remind you that the case law issued by the neo-judges is repealed by law. In the case of civilian proceedings pursuant to Article 379(4) in fine k.p.c. and criminal proceedings pursuant to Article 439(1)(6) in fine k.p.k.

What is neo-KRS and neo-Judge

The National Judicial Council was elected in a manner incompatible with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, which makes it impossible for the Court of Justice to recognise it in the light of the adopted line of the jurisprudence of the ultimate Court and the TEU as a body acting as acting and having the power to appoint judges. Any justice appointed by that unconstitutional authority and appointed by the president to execute is besides served by a noe-judge who has no legal capacity to issue judgment,

At this point it will be justified to rise that the problem of vocations of "judges" after the formation of the "National Judicial Council" as a consequence of changes in 2017 has respective aspects. The first is related to the provisions of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, which impose on public authorities, including the legislator, the work of specified appointment of judges to judicial duties, which guarantees the essential minimum independency and independency of the bodies active in the nomination process. This body is the National Judicial Board. engagement in constitutional standards for shaping the judicial composition of this body, creating an chance for politicians to form the Council, i.e. the election of members of the judges of the Council in their entirety by parliament (excluding the 1st president of the SN and the president of the NSA), has caused this body to neglect to meet constitutional requirements. This makes in any event the appointment of a justice question arise, which accompanies any man who puts his case under the judgement of the court, whether this court is simply a constitutional court.

In addition, this is the second aspect – in the doctrine to which I have given my hand, and in the case-law, there has been a method of verifying the correctness of the appointment of judges based on tools that have been in the strategy since forever, but mostly not utilized to measure the fulfilment of minimum conditions of impartiality and independence. It is the institutions (in the case of preventive control) – iudex sspectus and iudex inhabilis, and in the case of follow-up control – the absolute appeal condition, which is the incorrect cast of the court. On this thought the position of the resolution of the 3 Joint Chambers of the ultimate Court of January 2020 was placed. The resolution contained not precisely the right differentiation: indicating that, in the case of an SN, due to the nature of that authority, judges appointed after a advice of the KRS formed after 2017, do not supply guarantees of independent and impartial ruling. For this reason, it was considered that only this organization flaw justifies the claim that specified judges are deprived of material votum. The resolution did not competition that these persons had obtained the position of SN judges, but it was found that they had no power to issue judgments.

The judgments of specified ‘judges’ so far have been affected by the defect, given the inadequate cast of the court, which should be regarded as a failure to fulfil the constitutional request of the competent court referred to in Article 45(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. Failed judges should not rule. From the date of the resolution, these judges shall be incapable to rule. They do not have a material votum, although they have the position of judges. In the light of the above, it should be considered that, pursuant to Article 91(2) and (3) of the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union and of the ECHR, the rule of precedence of the application of the law

This is justified in the judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 6 October 2021 in Case C-487/19, as well as in the erstwhile judgement of the European Court of Human Rights of 7 May 2021, action No 4907/18. I remind the hooded court that, in accordance with Article 9 of the Constitution, the Republic of Poland is obliged to respect its binding global law. In accordance with Article 91(2) of the Constitution, an global agreement ratified with the prior consent expressed in the Act shall take precedence over the law if that law cannot be reconciled with the agreement. The position of judges and the guarantees of the independency of courts, which constitute the essence of the right to a fair trial, are enshrined in the provisions of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and are further confirmed in Article 6(3) of the Treaty on EU. In the present case, the judgement given on 7 October 2021 by the Constitutional Court in the present – defective – composition of the case in Case No. K 13/21, which reconciles the interests of citizens.

Our position on the neo-CRS and neo-Judges appointed by this unconstitutional body confirms the position of the European Commission, which decided on 15 February 2023 to mention Poland to the Court of Justice of the European Union in connection with the controversial ruling of the Polish Constitutional Court. The Commission opened infringement proceedings against Poland on 22 December 2021. – The reason was the judgments of the Polish Constitutional Court of 14 July 2021 and 7 October 2021, in which it declared the provisions of the EU treaties to be incompatible with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, explicitly questioning the rule of primacy of EU law. Without doubt, in light of the content of the judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union (Grand Chamber) of 19 November 2019 (Nos C 585/18, C-624/18, C 625/18) and the resolution of the full composition of the ultimate Court of 23 January 2020 (BSA I-4110-1/20), there is simply a basis for concluding that the institution designated to guarantee the regulation of law is breaking the law and commits the crime.

We remind you that the case law issued by the neo-judges is repealed by law. In the case of civilian proceedings pursuant to Article 379(4) in fine k.p.c. and criminal proceedings pursuant to Article 439(1)(6) in fine k.p.k.

You request legal assistance, compose us or call us right now.

579-636-527

[email protected]