-0.jpg)
Since all political forces in Poland, including the Minister of Justice and the lawyer General, as well as the IPN, are convinced of the crime of genocide, which is not subject to statute of limitations, why do the media not inform us of the ongoing processes of circumstantial perpetrators – genocide killers?
The deficiency of media reports on UPA veterans' trials powerfully contrasts with the emerging information about the criminal liability of members of German concentration camps [ https://independent.pl/world/German-prosecution-puts-charge- former-guard-camp-concentration/496249 ] On the website of the Institute of National Memory in the "Acts of Charge" on 398 of the acts discussed, we will not find any indictment of the crimes committed on Poles during planet War II by Germans, Russians, Belarusians, Lithuanians, or Ukrainians. [https://ipn.gov.pl/en/investigation/act-accusations To learn the communicative from this 1 fragment of the IPN website, you can get the impression that 6 million Polish victims of planet War II are victims of the criminal activity of Poles themselves.
The Republic of Poland, as well as another countries whose representatives have signed the UN Convention on the Prevention and punishment of Genocide Crimes, have already committed themselves in the first article to punish it: "Contracting Parties confirm that genocide committed both during peace and during war constitutes a crime in the face of global law, and undertake to prevent and punish this crime." [http://libr.sejm.gov.pl/tek01/txt/onz/1948a.html] It seems apparent that the crime of genocide itself cannot be punished, but its perpetrators. Even if the authorities of the Republic of Poland do not feel morally obliged to punish the murderers of 2 100 1000 Poles in Volyn and east Małopolska, they should prosecute them due to the binding global law of Poland. Moreover, genocide killers should besides be prosecuted by all another contracting parties, in peculiar Germany, the US, and Ukraine itself.
The crime of genocide was prohibited under punishment in Article 118(1) of the Criminal Code.
This provision is included in the Criminal Code of 6 June 1997, and thus from a time much later than the actions of the alleged UPA, and so the defenders and apologists of UPA's activities will surely rise the argument that the pull of planet War II criminals violates the prohibition of retroactive action.
The argument that criminal law was banned backwards was besides raised in the context of Katyń Crimes and many communist crimes. Doubts about the importance of banning criminal law were dispelled by Fr Zdzisław Peszkowski and Grzegorz Jędrejek: ‘In accordance with Article 42(1) of the Constitution, ‘criminal liability shall be imposed only on those who commit a criminal offence under a law in force at the time of its execution’. So the question may arise as to whether the perpetrator of communist crimes can be tried at all before the Polish court? In the second conviction of the cited article, the legislator stated that the rule of non-retrospective action “does not prevent punishment for an act which, at the time of its execution, constituted an offence under global law. » Thus, punishing Stalinist or Nazi criminals is not contrary to the rule of «lex retro non agit» due to the fact that these crimes were contrary to the global law applicable at the time erstwhile they were committed, which is the origin of the law in force in the Republic of Poland“ [p. Zdzisław Peszkowski, Grzegorz Jędrejek "The Katyń Crime under the Law of Warsaw-London-Orchard Lake – Pelplin 2004 p. 38]. Therefore, if it is lawful to hold the perpetrators of Nazi crimes or Katyń Crime responsible, it is possible to prosecute the surviving perpetrators of the genocide in Volyn for the same reasons.
But would it be possible to prosecute members of the alleged Ukrainian Insurgency Army for the very fact that they belong to it as an organization to commit crimes?
As is widely known, the Nuremberg global Military Court has recognised SA, SS, Gestapo and NSDAP as criminal organizations. https://ipn.gov.pl/en/history-z-ipn/123554, Nuremberg-process-German-criminals.html
The current Criminal Code, in Article 258(2), provides for a punishment of 1 to 8 years for participation in an organised armed criminal group or for the intent of committing a terrorist offence.
In consequence to Charles Karski's interpelling No. 7548 concerning the anticipation of being punished for belonging to criminal groups and organizations, then Undersecretary of State in the Ministry of Justice Andrzej Duda explained: "In the Polish legal order, the question of liability for participation in a criminal organization, established or recognised by the authorities of the German State or an allied or by a political association that acted in the interests of the German State or an allied state, was governed by Article 4(1) of the Decree of the Polish National Liberation Committee of 31 August 1944 on the punishment dimension for fascist-Hitlerian criminals guilty of killing and bullying the civilian population and prisoners of war and for traitors of the Polish Nation (Journal of Laws No. 4, item 16, as amended). He considered specified a crime a crime threatened by prison punishment for 3 years or a life conviction or death penalty. It should besides be borne in head that, in accordance with Article 4(1) of the Criminal Decree, participation in the organisation was subject to participation, which is simply a concept which is narrower than belonging to the organisation. In the light of Article 4(2) and (3) of that decree, the concept of a criminal organisation established or recognised by, or allied with, the authorities of the German State or by a political association which acted in the interests of, or allied with, the German State was understood to be much broader and besides encompassed organisations and groups another than those declared criminal by the global Military Court. The criminal organization of the decree was considered to be a group or organization which aims at crimes against peace, war crimes or crimes against humanity, or which, with another purpose, is able to accomplish it by committing the crimes mentioned. In addition, the provision provides for, for example, criminal organisations to which membership has been punished. These were: the German National Socialist Workers organization (NSDAP), in management positions, safety relays (SS), secret state police (Gestapo) and safety service (SD). The August decree, by just an example of the calculation of criminal organizations, gave the Polish courts the right to recognise as criminal organizations not mentioned in the judgement of the ICC. Polish courts (in peculiar the ultimate National Court and the ultimate Court), in addition to the organizations mentioned in the decree, found them criminal: management of the Guberni General Administration, organizational structure of concentration camps, Ukrainian Insurgency Army (UPA), Selbstschutz. The provision of Article 4(1) of the Decree on the punishment of fascist-Hitlerian criminals guilty of the killing and abuse of civilians and captives and of traitors to the Polish Nation cannot presently be the basis of prosecution and conviction, as it has lost its power under Article 5(1)(3) of the Act of 6 June 1997. Provisions introducing the Criminal Code (Journal of Laws No. 88, item 554, as amended).
There are, however, no legal obstacles to the prosecution and punishment of crimes or offences, including those committed by members of SD, SS or Gestapo, if specified an act constitutes a crime against humanity within the meaning of Article 3 of the Act on the Institute of National Memory - the Commission for the Prosecution of Crimes against the Polish Nation and a crime against peace, humanity or war crime, provided for in the Criminal Code or by global law.” [http://orka2.sejm.gov.pl/IZ5.nsf/main/60976292 ]
According to the above consequence to Karol Karski's parliamentary appeal, the democratically Polish State, repealing the communist decree on the punishment for fascist-Hitler criminals guilty of killing and bullying civilians and prisoners of war and traitors of the Polish Nation abolished the crime of belonging, while Membership of the SS or the Gestapo is inactive prohibited under penalty, as Andrzej Duda pointed out: “In this legal state, it should be considered that the conduct of belonging to SD, SS or Gestapo constitutes an act prohibited under the punishment provided for in the global agreement - Article X of the Charter of the global Military Court.“
One of the natural candidates for the jury accused of serving Germany in the infamous 14th SS Infantry Division “Galizen” is applauded in the Canadian parliament, among others, by Volodymyr Zelenski Jarosław Hunka https://wpolitics.pl/world/663926-options-in-cannadian-for-veterana-ss-galizien-byl-tam-zelenski . If there was even 1 prosecutor in Poland, for example the general one, he would surely have initiated criminal proceedings concerning the late applauded SS-man due to belonging to the Waffen SS. On the another hand, Canada, on the basis of the Charter of the global Military Court, should justice it alternatively of publically expressing its regret for its honour.
Paradoxically, Petr Poroshenko's granting of Kombatant powers to all UPA veterans including perpetrators of crimes against humanity made it easier for the Institute of National Memory to find the identity of the perpetrators of the crimes on the basis of applications submitted to the Ukrainian State. https://www.tvp.info/40564050/all-member-upa-honored-guilty-crime-against-humanity-in-group-veternow In order to find the perpetrators, it would be adequate to compare the veterans' ellipse before the amendment on the designation of the perpetrators as veterans and after the entry into force of this amendment.
According to the National Memorial Institute, criminal proceedings are being conducted on the subject of genocide in Volyn. https://zbrodniawolynska.pl/zwa1/investigation/155, Investigation-OKSZpNP-in-Lublin-in-crime-humanity-on-Volyn.html. The author of the text, prosecutor Piotr Zając from the territory Crime Investigation Commission against the Polish Nation laments: "Thus, in fact, the IPN prosecutor was required to conduct a more careful investigation, taking into account the socio-historical context, alternatively than simply securing evidence for the court allowing the perpetrator to be convicted or, in the event of its failure, to discontinue proceedings. So it is only after a comprehensive explanation of the substance that the proceedings can be dismissed. erstwhile we put it in, we must exhaust the full evidence initiative.“
A message held from taxpayers of the Public Prosecutor's Office should be outraged due to the fact that it does not inform any findings made in the investigation, about established perpetrators of crimes, conducted evidence, interrogated witnesses and victims, carried out exhumations, but complains that it cannot simply drop the investigation.
The IPN prosecutor so states that since the beginning of “Free Poland” he has failed to accomplish any of the goals of criminal proceedings, establish the identity of any of the murderers of 200,000 Poles. Article 45(5) of the Act on the Institute of National Memory – the Commission for the Investigation of Crimes against the Polish Nation states that the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure apply to the conduct of investigations by the IPN, and therefore, in peculiar the proceedings under that law should origin (similar to criminal proceedings) to:
1) the perpetrator of the crime has been found and brought to justice and the innocent has not been held responsible,
2) the objectives of criminal proceedings have been met not only in the fight against crime but besides in the prevention of crimes,
3. the legitimate interests of the victim have been taken into account while respecting his dignity,
4) the decision has taken place within a reasonable time.
A comparison of the IPN investigation concerning the genocide in Volyn with the objectives of the criminal proceedings set out in Article 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure indicates that these objectives have not been achieved and there is no indication that this will change. no of the perpetrators of the crime in which at least tens of thousands of Ukrainians were involved, let alone bringing him to criminal responsibility, were found to be harmed by Poles who lost their loved ones, health, property, and consequently their right to obtain, for example, compensation from the unestablished perpetrators in criminal proceedings was not taken into account in any way, despite the considerable passage of time, no settlement took place, in peculiar no indictment was brought to court. It should not be hard to find at least any of the victims, and with them besides the perpetrators of the crimes, since the perpetrators were usually neighbors. celebrated composer and author of the book on Volyn, Krzesimir Dębski "Nothing is right. Volyn. My household history” knows the murderers of his grandparents: ‘And you know there's nothing to hide in the country, everybody knows everything. They know precisely who murdered, who robbed, due to the fact that the robbery was very important, too. any of us most likely have our stuff by now. They wouldn't let us in. But they know we know. They said that I was very akin to my grandpa Leopold, who treated them for free. My parent couldn’t stand it then and asked, “Why did you kill him?” They replied, «It was the right thing to do. specified times were.” My parent asked, «What if you had to now?» She heard, “That too”. But why would they execution now? Are we taking something from them now?It’s okay. ”
[https://jagiellonia.org/kwisimir-debski-actually-in-each-branch-upa-Former-Soviet-instructor].
Furthermore, it is common cognition that IPN prosecutors did not carry out exhumation in Ukraine (called in Article 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the removal of corpses from the grave), and thus besides inspect them. I do not have the cognition essential to find whether Polish prosecutors reported to the Ukrainian authorities the intention to carry out such, absolutely crucial evidence, and if so, how many bodies were intended to exhume. Given the fact that the investigation into the genocide in Volyn is conducted by 1 prosecutor who, in accordance with Article 209 §2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, conducts (i.e. has a work to carry out) the examination of the corpses, it is hard to imagine how he would fulfil his work to participate in the examination of the bodies of tens or hundreds of thousands of our countrymen. This suggests that the Institute of National Memory has never had adequate resources (prosecutions, investigators) to conduct an examination of the victims' corpses, and thus the anticipation of exhumation, and thus the conduct of evidence in the ongoing investigation, was never seriously considered.
Likewise, I did not find information that the Institute of National Memory, in connection with the ongoing investigation, sought eyewitnesses from Ukrainian genocide or members of their families to conduct evidence from witnesses' interrogation.
The negative assessment of IPN inaction by the Authors of the "Codyan Crimes under the Law" remains: "The talkable character is the IPN's attitude towards Katyn crime, which is not only a Polish symbol of Stalinist crimes. Refusing to analyse means it's hard to talk about the impartiality of this institution. It can be noted in the margins that another investigations into genocide carried out in Poles are besides carried out in the incorrect way. For example, the Lublin branch of the Institute of National Memory conducts an investigation into genocide committed on the Polish population by Ukrainian nationalists. The investigation has been conducted since 1991, first by the territory Crime Investigation Commission against the Polish Nation and then since 2000 as part of the IPN Investigative Division. In an article devoted to the “Our Journal” investigation in 2003, we could read the information provided by the prosecutor conducting the investigation, for which the Kresovians were to wait for a long time, that “it was possible to say with large probability that genocide happened there” It was besides possible to read the information that «since the reopening of the IPN investigative unit, tens of thousands of Poles in Volyn are being investigated by 1 prosecutorIt’s okay. ” [p. Zdzisław Peszkowski, Grzegorz Jędrejek “The Katyń Crime under the Law. p. 278]. Despite the passing of nineteen years since the release of the Katyń Crimes, the negative assessment of the soviets imprisoned in Kozielsk by Fr. Prof. Zdzisław Peszkowski and prof. Grzegorz Jędrejek did not in any way affect the implementation of any effective actions in the investigation.
One genocide or a tiny genocide?
There is no uncertainty that the planning by the UPA management of the crime of genocide in Volyn was composed of a number of activities specified as the demolition of individual Polish villages, or the execution of individual Poles. Is it possible, then, that a rezun from UPA who murdered “only” 1 Polish household is liable for the crime of genocide?
To answer that question, delight mention to Article 18(1) of the Criminal Code, which states that “responsible is not only the individual who performs a prohibited act himself or jointly and in consultation with another person, but besides the individual who directs the performance of a prohibited act by another individual or who makes usage of another person's dependence on himself, recommends the performance of specified an act.“ This provision provides the basis for liability for co-declaration (who performs an act prohibited jointly and in consultation with another person), management (who directs the performance of a prohibited act) and recommending (who uses the addiction of another individual to himself recommends the performance of a prohibited act).
In the manual “The Law of Material Penalty. General section" under Mark Mozgawa Edition 5 reads: "Co-procedure shall consist of the act prohibited jointly and in agreement by at least 2 persons. The fundamental advantage of the co-operative plan is the anticipation of assigning to each of the co-conspirators what others have done in implementing the agreement. No substance what the function of a peculiar co-conspirator in the implementation of the statutory terms of the prohibited act, he is liable for all that has been covered by the agreement. An essential part of co-operation is the agreement. Its form is arbitrary. It is even possible to conclude an agreement implicitly (conclusive). This is, for example, erstwhile 2 people attack another individual spontaneously, without any prior arrangement.” [https://books.google.pl/books?id=N_ZPEAAQBAJ&pg=PA386&lpg=PA386&dq=wsp%C3%B3%C5%82performance&source=bl&ots=oxric_TCBv&sig=ACfU3U3XxXklOhYV5Bv-bGDkI0x0CQ9BA&hl=pl&sa=X&ved=2ahUKewjYnumb1YBaxWwHAIHWI9ICSA4FDoAXoECBUQAw#v=onepage&q=wsp%C3%B3%C5%82service&f=false]
One form of co-operation is the complementary co-action which the ultimate Court referred to in its judgement of 14 January 2020, No. II KK 8/19: "Complementary co-operation, consisting in the fulfilment by 1 of the liaising all the characteristics and the implementation of the parts of the characteristics by the another of the liaising or the fulfilment by each of the liaising under the agreement only the parts of the prohibited act, where, after their behaviour and making them a single valuation basis together, they will lead to the fulfilment of all the prohibited act characteristics“ [http://www.sn.pl/sites/a jurisprudence/Resolution3/II%20KK%208-19-2.pdf ]
When it comes to clarifying the concept of co-action to the ground of the genocide in Volyn, it must be stated that:
- each Ukrainian active in an attack on 1 Polish village or household in the execution of an earlier genocide plan is liable for the full act covered by the agreement, i.e. the death of all the victims who died in the attack, and as a consequence of the full UPA management plan,
- individual perpetrators did not gotta fulfil all the criteria of genocide (the anticipation of attributing what others did) in order to bear the work for the full act covered by the agreement, it is adequate to fill in any of the characteristics of the crime, i.e. participation in the attack or state of chat,
- the agreement concerning genocide did not require any peculiar form of the agreement to be maintained and the participants of it in an implicit form were not only members of the UPA, but besides average Ukrainian villagers who spontaneously began to burn the homes of Polish neighbors, execution and plunder their property
- It is incorrect to believe that Stefan Bandera was not a criminal guilty of genocide, due to the fact that in the period from 1941 individual killing prevented him from being isolated from Germany in Sachsenhausen, due to the fact that as the leader of the OUN he was at least a perpetrator recommending genocide, and thus Article 18 § 1 of the Criminal Code allows him to be attributed to genocide.
Article III of the Convention on the Prevention and punishment of Genocide Crime ratified by Poland states that: "The following acts are punishable: (a) genocide, (b) conspiracy to commit genocide, (c) direct and public incitement to commit genocide, (d) attempted genocide, (e) complicity in genocide.”. This catalogue of criminal offences indicates that Poland, as well as Ukraine, which has been exempt from punishing the co-conspirators of the genocide in Volyn, does not fulfil its conventional obligations and so binding Poland, in accordance with Article 9 of the Constitution of global Law. Interestingly, no global institution, nor any state, is asking that the obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and punishment of Genocide Crimes be actually carried out by Poland or Ukraine.
Ukraine does not enforce its work to prosecute its perpetrators of genocide, despite the ease of establishing their identity on the withdrawal of statements in which they granted affiliation to the UPA or the collaboration formation of the 3rd Reich in order to receive Kombatanian pensions from the Ukrainian State [ https://superbiz.se.pl/news/skandal-badders-have-been-from-government-retirement-sa-treated-as-veterani-ii-ws-aa-24e9-NfXX-RvJu.html It questions whether Ukraine is able to keep any global agreement it has concluded.
Responding to the question of whether there was only 1 crime of genocide, which lasted from December 1942 to February 1944, and even to the post-war years, or whether all single act of demolition of the Polish village was a separate crime of genocide, it seems decisive to have been the joint intention of perpetrators. In the case of the management of UPA, the intention was to exterminate the Polish population throughout the territory inhabited by Ukrainians, while in the case of Ukrainian villagers supporting UPA, the agreement could be limited to the genocide in the area inhabited by them or neighbouring village. Tomasz Turejko explains in the article “Volyn. Genocide or cultural cleansing with signs of genocide?“ The uncovering that the perpetrators intended to execution all Polish neighbors only in the neighbouring village does not make them guilty of genocide: “The above indicates that mass crimes, which can be counted in hundreds of thousands, or even millions, do not should be classified as genocide. In turn, genocide may be considered smaller-scale crimes (e.g. crime in Srebrenica) if the immediate intention of the perpetrators was to destruct a protected group (in this case spiritual – Bosnian Muslims) in a closely marked geographical territory (enclave in Srebrenica). Crimes committed in the direct intent to destruct a group concentrated in enclaves can frequently be classified as genocide. In the Goran Jelisicia case, the Court even ruled that genocide could only be committed within a single municipality.“ https://magazinekontra.pl/wolyn-humanity-i-e-ethnic purgatory-o-signs-humanity/
However, the fact that the perpetrators jointly intend to execution all Poles surviving in Volyn and east Małopolska should not constitute an obstacle to the Prosecutor of the IPN to bring only those perpetrators of crimes whose actions have been explained so that it is possible to bring the indictment to court. In accordance with § 109 of the Regulation of the Minister of Justice of 7 April 2016 of the Rules of Procedure of the Public Prosecutor's Office, it is possible to exclude for separate preparatory proceedings materials concerning certain persons or acts by way of order of the Prosecutor. utilizing a simple example, if the prosecutor of the IPN were able to interview Krzesimir Dębski as the victim and find the details of the murderer of his grandparents, whom he repeatedly referred to in interviews, he could issue a decision to exclude the thread of this peculiar Ukrainian murderer from the investigation into the Volynsk Crimes, carry out the essential evidence (interview of the suspect, the victim, possible witnesses), and if the evidence gathered justifies the advanced probability of his committing the crime from the Polish court to send the indictment. Even if the scope of the investigation is besides wide (includes the execution of 2 100 1000 people) the prosecutor, thanks to the institutions excluding part of the case for a separate investigation is not helpless and he does not gotta wait for the anticipation to cancel the investigation due to the death of the perpetrators.
Conclusions:
1. all Ukrainian who entered into an agreement in order to execution the Polish population surviving in Volyn and east Małopolska and self-executed any of the factors of genocide (taken part in it) is simply a co-conspirator of genocide and is liable for the full crime, which included the agreement, and not only for the effects it caused itself.
2. The conclusion of an agreement by concrete perpetrators concerning the execution of Poles from only 1 village, municipality or territory does not exclude the classification of their actions as a crime of genocide.
3. The Institute of National Memory has been investigating the genocide in Volyn since 1991, in which, despite the passing of thirty-two years, no key evidence has been carried out in the form of exhumation and examination of the corpses, interrogation of witnesses, and the perpetrators have not been detected, nor have they been brought to justice. The IPN prosecutor expressed regret that he could not neglect the proceedings.
4. In the event that the Prosecutor of the IPN establishes at least any of the perpetrators of 1 of the events involving the crime of genocide, e.g. the execution of 1 Polish family, he should exclude this thread for a separate investigation and bring to court an indictment concerning only the criminal liability of the established perpetrators.
5. In the current legal state, UPA members are not liable for the specified fact of participating in this formation, but already surviving members of the Ukrainian 14th SS Grenadier Division are inactive liable for criminal liability under the Statute of the global Military Court for the very fact of serving in the SS, regardless of the individual crimes they have committed.
6. The deficiency of effective prosecution of perpetrators constitutes a violation of the UN Convention on the Prevention and punishment of Genocide Crime ratified by both Poland and Ukraine.
cdn.
BL
