Konrad K., the former president of the board of GetBack, remains under arrest. Earlier, the man asked to leave the detention center, where he has been staying for over 2 years. The District Court in Warsaw did not take him into account, and the prosecutor requested that his isolation be extended for another six months. The date of the hearing is still unknown.
– The court considered the accused’s requests to revoke or change the preventive measure in the form of pre-trial detention and decided not to take them into account and to maintain in force the preventive measure in the form of pre-trial detention – the Independent Press Section of the District Court in Warsaw informed PAP.
GetBack case – still no deadline
The prosecutor from the Regional Prosecutor’s Office in Warsaw, who was present at the Thursday session of the court, requested that the District Court in Warsaw apply to the Court of Appeal in Warsaw to extend Konrad K.’s arrest for another 6 months. Judge Iwona Strączyńska acceded to the prosecutor’s request. The date of the isolation measure applied to K. so far is 11 September.
A spokeswoman for the district court, judge Beata Adamczyk-Łabuda, informed in an interview with PAP that due to the particular complexity of the case and its importance, the court of first instance would consider using the content of Art. 28 par. 3. of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which allows the bench to be expanded from one to three judges, or one judge and two lay judges. Therefore, the date of examining the case of the so-called the GetBack scandal has not yet been determined.
The case has been waiting for recognition for nine months.
About the filing of the first indictment related to the so-called The GetBack scandal was announced on October 26 last year. during the press conference, the National Public Prosecutor Bogdan Święczkowski. 16 people were covered by the act, including Konrad K., the former president of the GetBack management board. Also Jarosław A. and Tobiasz B. – former CEOs of Idea Bank as well as Dariusz N. and Małgorzata Sz. – members of the management board of Idea Bank. The indictment was 1,200 pages long and the files contained 1,600 volumes. They were accused of committing fraud, abusing the powers granted, causing large-scale damage and conducting brokerage activities without the required permit, for which they face a penalty of up to 15 years’ imprisonment.
The National Public Prosecutor Bogdan Święczkowski explained in October last year how the perpetrators who extorted money from Poles acted. – GetBack issued over 5 million bonds, which were then offered to ordinary Poles and investors through banks or brokerage houses, said Święczkowski. As he noted, investors were misled as to the financial condition of GetBack, its rating, or the possibility of earning money on it. – Yes 9 thousand people suffered a loss of approximately PLN 3 billion – said Święczkowski.
GetBack case – return of the indictment
On February 17 this year, four months after sending the case materials, the District Court in Warsaw decided that it would return the indictment to the prosecutor’s office. They requested it, inter alia, defendants of the accused. The court accused the prosecutor’s office, inter alia, of failure to interview all the aggrieved parties (over 9,000 people), violation of the rights of the accused to read the files at the end, or gaps in the opinions of experts.
The Regional Prosecutor’s Office in Warsaw immediately appealed against the decision of the court to return the indictment. The Court of Appeal in Warsaw set the dates for examining the complaint, first in April and then in May, but none of them took place. May 24 this year. a decision was made that the appeal, due to the complexity of the case, would be examined by an extended panel of three judges. The hearing in this case was held only on July 29, but was adjourned on August 4, the Court of Appeal in Warsaw decided that the materials collected by the Regional Prosecutor’s Office in Warsaw regarding the so-called the GetBack scandals are sufficient for the District Court in Warsaw to recognize it and issue a fair verdict. The three-person composition of the court of appeal, chaired by judge Ewa Leszczyńska-Furtak, concluded that the evidence collected by the prosecutor had no deficiencies, or – if there were any – did not exceed the capacity of the court which would have to conduct it in the hearing room. The shortcomings described by the District Court in Warsaw are mainly, according to SA, “technical and not substantive shortcomings”, eg no copy of the decision on appointing financial and accounting experts. The appellate court wrote that it would be enough for Judge Iwona Strączyńska to ask for these documents to be supplemented during the proceedings on the return of the case, which “took place within a month”.
“The purpose of the preparatory proceedings is not to comprehensively explain the case, but to explain its circumstances to the extent that it is possible to establish that a prohibited act constituting a crime has been committed, supported by secured and to the necessary extent consolidated evidence” – wrote Judge Leszczyńska-Furtak.
The appellate court reminded the district court that “significant shortcomings of the preparatory proceedings are those that constitute an obstacle to making true factual determinations, thus preventing the implementation of the principle of substantive truth, (…) exceed the level of ordinary difficulties, and therefore require a lot of effort and effort “and that cases in the courts should be dealt with efficiently and quickly. The case may be returned to the public prosecutor’s office to be supplemented only if the prosecutor’s supplementing any shortcomings would accelerate the process.
“The position of the District Court that the indicated discrepancies in the descriptions of the acts (…) as well as the discrepancies or inconsistencies in the charges against individual defendants were to be in the nature of shortcomings is unfounded.” (…) Different views of the court as to the description or legal classification of the acts in the indictment may be the basis for a refund. …
The appellate court also failed to notice the inability to familiarize themselves with the files that were available to them in paper, digitized and – later – also in court, reported by the defendants of the accused and the district court. SA did not consider it a breach to refrain from questioning all 9,000 aggrieved persons by the prosecutor, because it was due to the procedural economy and had no significant impact on the factual findings.
“This case requires a quick judgment” – wrote the Court of Appeal in Warsaw and transferred the case to the District Court in Warsaw “for substantive examination” on August 4.
The GetBack Affair
The Regional Prosecutor’s Office in Warsaw initiated an investigation into the GetBack scandal the day after the notification was submitted by the Polish Financial Supervision Authority, on April 24, 2018. An investigative team was appointed. On May 11, 2018, the first searches and security measures for documents, information media and property were carried out, and in June 2018, Konrad K., the former president of GetBack, was detained. In connection with the investigation, the amount of PLN 400 million was secured, including valuables, jewelry, real estate, securities and money in bank accounts.
Already in October, Święczkowski informed that further indictments would be successively sent to the court. The investigation conducted at the Regional Prosecutor’s Office in Warsaw still concerns nearly 60 people. One of them is Leszek Czarnecki, suspected of committing frauds to the detriment of Idea Bank SA customers and causing the bank a large amount of damage. In July last year the prosecutor’s office issued a decision to present charges to Czarnecki in connection with the so-called the GetBack scandal, but they were not formally announced to him, because the businessman is permanently abroad. The prosecution believes that Czarnecki is in hiding. In April this year. the court legally dismissed all motions of the prosecutor’s office, which demanded the arrest of the businessman.
Main photo source: Shutterstock