19.9 C
London
Monday, July 22, 2024

The case of Mariusz Kamiński and Maciej Wąsik. Professor Andrzej Zoll comments

Must read

- Advertisement -


Professor Andrzej Zoll, former president of the Constitutional Tribunal and former Ombudsman, said in “Fakty po Faktach” on TVN24 that on Monday he is to meet with the Speaker of the Sejm, Szymon Hołownia, and act as an advisory voice on how he should deal with the convicted Mariusz Kamiński. and Maciej Wąsik. When asked what he would tell him if he asked him whether he should let both politicians into the Sejm, he replied: – I would definitely answer that he should not let them in.

READ MORE – IN POINTS: “We have a lawless community.” The case of Kamiński and Wąsik step by step

Stanisław Zakoczymski, the general director in charge of the Office of the Speaker of the Sejm, said on Friday on TVN24 that Marshal Hołownia will hold a number of official consultative meetings on Monday and Tuesday regarding attitude towards Mariusz Kamiński and Maciej Wąsik, if they intended to get to the Sejm on Wednesday and participate in the session starting that day.

According to Zakromski’s announcement, Hołownia will talk, among others, with the Minister of Justice and the Ombudsman, but also with “outstanding legal authorities.” The case is related to the fact that Kamiński and Wąsik were sentenced to prison terms by a final judgment at the end of December, and Marshal Hołownia issued decisions to declare the expiration of their parliamentary mandates.

- Advertisement -

Professor Zoll: I was invited to Monday by Marshal Hołownia

Professor Andrzej Zoll, former president of the Constitutional Tribunal, former Ombudsmanformer chairman of the National Electoral Commission, said in “Fakty po Faktach” on TVN24 that he was invited to these consultations on Monday.

– I am invited to Monday by the Marshal, I will talk on Monday – he said.

When asked what he would tell him if he asked him whether I should let Kamiński and Wąsik into the Sejm, he replied: – I would definitely answer that he should not let them in. Because these people no longer have a parliamentary mandate. They lost their parliamentary mandate when the District Court in Warsaw issued a judgment, sentencing these people to imprisonment for committing an intentional crime, prosecuted by public prosecution.

As he added, “these are conditions that automatically result in the cancellation of the ticket.” – There are many misunderstandings in the entire proceedings that followed. After all, the Speaker of the Sejm does not cancel the mandate. This is not his competence. The mandate is canceled by a court decision. However, the Marshal of the Sejm announces and makes public that the mandate has been withdrawn from these people. They may submit a request to the Supreme Court to examine the basis for the Marshal’s actions. The Marshal only needs to prove that he has received a document from the court confirming that a final judgment has been passed regarding the MP. And this is all that can also be examined by the court to which people who previously had a mandate can appeal, explained Professor Zoll.

He added that “the court here is very constrained in its examination.”

Prof. Zoll: Mr. Marshal should have no doubt that Mr. Kamiński and Mr. Wąsik have ceased to be MPs

The former president of the Constitutional Tribunal also referred to the legal chaos surrounding this case. Hołownia issued decisions confirming the expiry of the parliamentary mandates of Kamiński and Wąsik, they appealed to the Supreme Court, and the Chamber of Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs overturned the Marshal’s decisions. However, this Chamber is not recognized as a court under European law, a Court of Justice of the European Union stated that it is not an “independent and impartial court”. Meanwhile, on Wednesday, the Chamber of Labor and Social Insurance of the Supreme Court is also to hear politicians’ appeals against the Marshal’s decisions.

– First of all, from what I hear now, the verdict is questioned. The people who decided in the Chamber of Extraordinary Control (and Public Affairs – ed.) that the Marshal’s conduct was inappropriate cannot examine or comment on the content of the judgment at all. This is not their job. And it doesn’t matter whether a given chamber is a court or not, it is certainly not a matter for examination by the people sitting in this chamber – continued the guest of “Fakty po Faktach”.

– That is why I think that the Marshal should have no doubt that Mr. Kamiński and Mr. Wąsik have ceased to be MPs. And not now, and not because of this or that declaration from the Speaker of the Sejm, but they stopped being MPs (…) when the guilty verdict was passed – he continued.

The former president of the Constitutional Tribunal was also asked about the impact on the entire situation of the decision, which is to be made on Wednesday in the Chamber of Labor and Social Insurance of the Supreme Court.

– This decision has no significance when it comes to the mandate issue. The mandate has already been taken away. The significance of this decision is whether the marshal’s statement was made in accordance with the documents he received from the court. Mr. Marshal has no room to decide whether Mr. Kamiński or Mr. Wąsik has a mandate or not. This case was finally settled in court. Now this decision, which is to be made in the Chamber of Labor, has the same importance – the only thing that matters is whether the marshal received such a document, which determines the loss of the mandate. Just enough. There is actually no substantive inaccuracy here. All this is already taken care of, explained Professor Zoll.

Prof. Zoll: the judgment can only be reviewed in the cassation procedure

The lawyer also talked about the possibility of questioning the judgment in the case of Kamiński and Wąsik. – This Warsaw judgment can of course be examined and even changed, but in the cassation procedure. That is, by the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court, if a cassation appeal is filed, an application for cassation proceedings. This is the only way to challenge this judgment. There is no other one, he explained.

When asked whether cassation would stop the execution of the sentence, he replied that he could make such a decision Supreme Courtconsidering the case, “but under normal procedure, filing a cassation appeal does not interrupt the process of executing the penalty.”

Prof. Zoll: the judgment in the case of Kamiński and Wąsik can only be examined in the cassation procedureTVN24

Prof. Zoll: Kamiński and Wąsik currently have no right to enter the parliament building unless they get a pass

Professor Zoll was also asked how decisive the Speaker of the Sejm should be in a situation if politicians tried to force entry into the Sejm.

– Messrs. Kamiński and Wąsik currently have no right to enter the parliament building, unless (…), like every citizen, they have a pass. These are people who are no longer MPs, so they have no such right and (if – ed.) they get a pass, they can enter. If they wanted to (enter – ed.) by force, this is a course of action that, of course, requires the reaction of authorized persons, i.e. the Marshal’s Guard, and in an escalating situation, the police may also be needed – he pointed out.

Prof.  Zoll: Kamiński and Wąsik currently have no right to enter the parliament building unless they get a pass

Prof. Zoll: Kamiński and Wąsik currently have no right to enter the parliament building unless they get a passTVN24

Prof. Zoll: under European law, this chamber is not a judicial body

The professor was also asked whether, since the Court of Justice of the European Union found that the Chamber of Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs is not an “independent and impartial court”, its decisions have any significance in the legal system.

– NO. One thing is forgotten: as long as Poland exists member of the European Union, then we are obliged to respect the treaties. And the case law of the Court of Justice is valid throughout the European Union. Therefore, it also applies to us. All Polish state bodies are bound by the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice – the president, the marshal, the courts, the Supreme Court. All decisions are binding. This is the legal order in which the bodies operate and decide whether the law is one or the other, whether it allows or does not allow it – emphasized the TVN24 guest. He recalled that on December 21, a ruling was passed in the Court of Justice of the European Union stating that “this chamber operating at the Supreme Court, not in the Supreme Court, is not a court.” – The Court of Justice did not answer a question sent by this Chamber. Precisely because it is not a court. The Court of Justice does not answer questions from every body or office that sends such a question to it. Only courts can ask such questions for a preliminary ruling. This is an unequivocal statement that, according to European law, this Chamber of Extraordinary Control (and Public Affairs – ed.) is not a judicial body – added Professor Zoll.

Main photo source: TVN24



Source link

More articles

- Advertisement -

Latest article