Aktualne kierunki rozwoju władzy sądowniczej. Marsz Tysiąca Tóg rok później

Ladies and gentlemen,

Fellow Judges,

on February 4, 2021, a year will have passed since the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court (in case ref no II DO 1/20) adopted a resolution to suspend me from acting as a judge and deprive me of 40% of my salary.

Let me remind you that I was repressed for the fact that during the recognision of an appeal against a judgment issued by a judge appointed at the request of the neo-NCJ, I decided to investigate whether the parties of the trial were ­guaranteed the right to an independent and impartial court, legally seated. For this purpose, I requested the presentation of the so-called lists of support from candidates for the neo-NCJ in order to verify any irregularities that may have affected the process of appointing some members of the current NCJ. In this way, I complied with the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union of November 19,2019 (in joint cases: C-585/18, C-624/18 and C-625/18).

Unfortunately, the President of the District Court in Olsztyn executed the decision of the non-court Disciplinary Chamber and prevented me from serving as a judge and adjudicating. No action has been taken against me in my disciplinary case since November 28, 2019, when the charges were brought against me. Therefore, my suspension was aimed at long-term harassment for a judgment issued against the political authorities’ coup d’état in the judiciary, and above all, it was supposed to have a chilling effect in the judiciary community. Be aware, however, that I have not given up and I am constantly reporting my readiness to take up my service as judge.

After these events, I received a variety of support from judges and from civil society as a whole, for which I am very grateful. I was not alone. I know that I can count on you and you can count on me. Solidarity is our strength. It is our solidarity, the solidarity of Polish and European judges, lawyers and citizens that was beautifully demonstrated on January 11, 2020 in Warsaw during the March of a Thousand Robes. Remembering this event gives us all strength. Today, however, let us remember that our primary duty as judges is to adjudicate in accordance with the Constitution and in ­accordance with our conscience. I know that the overwhelming majority of judges are convinced of the violation of the rule of law and the violation of the Constitution by the current rulers in our country. I believe that this conviction will sooner or later be reflected in a courageous and independent decision on the status of persons nominated for judicial positions by the present politicized NCJ. We know that in the façade Constitutional Tribunal, chaired by Julia Przyłębska, there are so-called “Doubles judges” and it was with their participation that systemic decisions concerning the judiciary were made. This should lead us to apply more widely distributed constitutional control.

Above all, however, the assessment of the status of persons nominated for judicial posts by the neo-NCJ will probably become possible and common after the full implementation of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 1 December 2020 in the case of Ástráðsson v. Iceland (complaint No. 26374/18) and after neutralizing the so-called. “The muzzle lawA” (the Act of 20 December 2019 amending the Act – Law on the System of Common Courts, the Act on the Supreme Court and some other acts) and the complete obstruction of the activities of the Disciplinary Chamber, also in immunity proceedings. However, already now, without a real risk of sanctions, it is possible, for example, to submit questions for a preliminary ruling to the CJEU, or to adjudicate in a multi-member panel, bearing in mind the secrecy of judicial deliberation and voting without the obligation to submit a dissenting opinion. I am deeply convinced that this is the only way to guarantee citizens the right to independent and impartial judgments legally seated and to ensure – also for the future – an effective protection of judicial independence and the rule of law. All this for the good of our fellow citizens, because there is no freedom without the rule of law. Therefore, travestying the words of John F. Kennedy, I will say to each of you: “Don’t ask what others can do, ask what you can do for the rule of law”.

Thank you for your attention.