If the minister makes decisions that are unchecked, ill-considered, or not based on evidence, then unfortunately he must bear responsibility for it. In my opinion, compensation – said the former ombudsman, Professor Adam Bodnar, in “Fakty po Faktach”. “I mean the State Treasury,” he added.
In the Friday edition of “Fakty po Faktach” former ombudsman professor Adam Bodnar referred to the crisis in Polish agriculture. The TVN24 guest was asked what he would hear from farmers disappointed with the decisions of the rulers who downplayed the growing problem with Polish grain. In June 2022, the then Minister of Agriculture, Henryk Kowalczyk, appealed to farmers to remain calm, because “in the next six months, grain will definitely not be cheaper.”
– Citizens should hear that public authorities are bound by the principle of citizens’ trust in the state. If the state says something, if the state does something, its representatives must always have it thought out and verified, based on the results of specific research, and they must make decisions in such a way as to shape trust in the state every day, he said.
– If this trust is broken and it results from the state’s mistakes, from disregard, failure to check the facts, failure to analyze various circumstances, then the state is responsible for it – he added.
At the same time, Bodnar pointed out that “this is not an obvious situation”. – This is not a typical abuse of power, this is not a situation of acting against the law, but a situation of a certain recommendation, which comes not from a publicist or editor of an agricultural magazine, but from the minister – he said. – If the minister makes decisions that are unchecked, ill-considered, not based on evidence, then unfortunately he must bear responsibility for it. Compensation in my opinion, he said. When asked about this issue, he indicated that he meant the State Treasury.
Will the farmer win in court against the government? Bondar: why not?
When asked if he believed that the injured farmer could win against the government in court, the former Commissioner for Human Rights replied: “Why not?”. – Why couldn’t such a claim for damages be brought that acting and making a recommendation that is a guideline on how to proceed without appropriate evidence, only on the basis that the minister thinks that this constitutes an abuse of the law – he said.
– Maybe this will finally teach officials that every sentence that is spoken in public space must not be wishful thinking, but a sentence that should be checked – he added.
– If then the minister would take the report and show that he had such instructions and therefore gave such recommendations, then ok, he is fired. But if there is no such evidence, he may be abusing his power and unfit to perform these tasks, he stressed.
Main photo source: TVN24