The Chamber of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court did not lift Maciej Nawacki’s immunity

A subsidiary indictment (creating the possibility of accusing another person before the court independently or with the help of an attorney) against the president of the Olsztyn District Court, Maciej Nawacki, was filed in January this year by attorney Michał Romanowski, on behalf of judge Paweł Juszczyszyn.

Juszczyszyn accused Nawacki of acts related to failure to implement the judgments restoring him to work, including exceeding his powers (Article 231 of the Penal Code), as well as malicious and persistent violation of employee rights (Article 218 of the Penal Code).

– The interests of justice require the lifting of Maciej Nawacki’s immunity. For several years, he has refused to implement court decisions that bind him. Tolerating this type of behavior violates the authority of the court and its social perception as the guarantor of our freedom and rights – attorney Romanowski told OKO.press journalists.

– The statement of the cloakroom attendant from the film “Miś”, who said “we don’t have your coat, what will you do to us” regained its popularity thanks to, among others, Nawacki, as an illustration of contempt for court decisions – he added.

The trial could begin after the immunity is lifted. The case was heard on Tuesday at a public hearing in the Professional Responsibility Chamber of the Supreme Court.

In the justification of the decision, Supreme Court judge Zbigniew Korzeniowski admitted that “the case is precedent-setting.” – The judges may differ, they may also be wrong and not be held responsible due to this error. Here we have a specific case of judges from the same court who, as it was clear from the course of this hearing, knew each other before, still know each other, but they are on opposite sides – he said.

As Korzeniowski described, “the fact that the case law said that the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court was not a court, even the Supreme Court said so, does not mean that from that moment the Disciplinary Chamber ceased to be a court.” – A court ruling is not a source of common law – he noted.

Judge Korzeniowski noted that Juszczyszyn did not recognize the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court and “this is also what the courts that issued the injunctions claimed.” – Court decisions must be implemented and honored. But what to do when there is a conflict? – the judge asked. He added that, in his opinion, President Nawacki found himself in such a situation of conflict between the judgments of the Disciplinary Chamber and the common court.

– Neither Judge Juszczyszyn nor Judge Nawacki is responsible for the law as it is. Judges apply the law and may differ. We have a situation here where the conflict is deep on many levels and fields, he explained.

Therefore, as the judge said, the request to waive the immunity of the president of the Olsztyn District Court, Maciej Nawacki, was not granted. Korzeniowski assured that the justification for the decision will be prepared by November 21.

Today’s ruling of the Supreme Court does not end this battle because it is not final. – Of course, we do not agree with this decision and we will certainly appeal it – Judge Juszczyszyn announced to journalists after the announcement of the ruling. He added that he disagreed, among other things, with the statement in the justification that the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court was a court. – Well, it was not a court – he emphasized.

READ ALSO: OKO.press: The judge ordered a fine and possible arrest for Nawacki. They are prosecuted by the deputy disciplinary spokesman

On February 4, 2020, Judge Paweł Juszczyszyn was suspended from his duties by the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court, questioned as an independent body. In May last year, the Disciplinary Chamber – composed of one person, President Adam Rocha – lifted the suspension.

Juszczyszyn returned to work at the District Court in Olsztyn in mid-2022, but by Nawacki’s decision, he was transferred to the family department (before his suspension, he adjudicated in the civil department) and sent to overdue vacation.

Not agreeing to be transferred to another department, Judge Juszczyszyn appealed to the District Court in Bydgoszcz, which in January this year issued a decision to reinstate Juszczyszyn to adjudicate in the civil department. However, Nawacki did not implement this court decision.

This month, the court in Bydgoszcz validly ordered the reinstatement of judge Juszczyszyn to adjudicate in the home civil division of the District Court in Olsztyn.

READ MORE: The court ordered the reinstatement of Paweł Juszczyszyn to adjudicate in the parent department