Who are the ex-ministers jailed in Poland and why were they convicted?

Reuters ^ | January 10, 2024 | Anna Koper

[Ultra Sonic 007]

Former Polish Interior Minister Mariusz Kaminski and his deputy Maciej Wasik were detained by police and taken to prison on Tuesday after being convicted of abuse of power.

[...]

ANTI-CORRUPTION AGENCY

Kaminski was first elected a member of parliament in 1997 and was re-elected in 2001 and 2005. He resigned in 2006 to become the head of the Central Anti-Corruption Bureau.

Political opponents said he and his associates pursued corruption with excessive zeal, using methods they said sometimes circumvented laws and hounding innocent people.

PARDON

In 2015, Kaminski and Wasik were found guilty and sentenced to three years in prison. They appealed.

A few months later, after PiS came to power, President Andrzej Duda pardoned both men, allowing Kaminski to become interior minister.

Lawyers questioned whether Duda was entitled to pardon them before an appeals court issued a final ruling. The Supreme Court said last year that the case should be reopened.

COURT'S FINAL DECISION

After reopening the case, Kaminski and Wasik were sentenced in December to two years in prison. On Monday a court issued orders to take both men to prison.

Police entered Poland's presidential palace to detain the two on Tuesday. Prime Minister Donald Tusk had earlier accused Duda of obstructing justice after the two lawmakers appeared at the palace, prompting police to search for them in cars leaving the building.

Hundreds of protesters gathered in front of the palace and in front of a police station where the two were being held. The crowd chanted "Free political prisoners" and "Shame!"

In protest against his detention, Kaminski started a hunger strike, while Duda said he was deeply shaken by the arrests and vowed he would not rest until Kaminski and Wasik were freed.

[BenLurkin]

“pursued corruption with excessive zeal”

[madison10]

Sounds like that senile snake occupying the White House.

[dfwgator]

They had the goods on Tusk’s corruption.

[PGR88]

Here comes the State-run MSM narrative and ass-covering....

[ought-six]

Sounds like your angst should be directed towards the Polish courts, including Poland’s Supreme Court, as it was the Polish Supreme Court that re-opened the case, and the defendants were subsequently sentenced — after having previously being convicted — to two years in prison. They were then taken into custody to serve their sentences.

[PGR88]

They are also “insurrectionists”

As I said “here comes the neocon ass-covering....”

[ought-six]

“They are also ‘insurrectionists.’”

I read the article at the link, but there is no mention of “insurrectionists,” or anything even remotely associated with such a label. Is there another article to which you are referring?

“As I said ‘here comes the neocon ass-covering....’”

I have no idea to what you are referring, unless you are labeling the Polish courts “neo-cons,” as the action described in the article was, in fact, the result of the Polish legal process.

However, I am not very familiar with Poland’s legal system and its application. I am copying FReeper cronos on this as he may be in a position to explain it to us.

[PGR88]

Weird how if they are “just implementing a decision of the Supreme Court” it occurs months/years after-the-fact when the new EU/globalist Tusk takes over

hmmmmm

[Sir Bangaz Cracka]

Ummm... Because they’re conservatives?

[The Louiswu]

The Ex-Ministers. Good name for a band.

[ought-six]

“Weird how if they are ‘just implementing a decision of the Supreme Court’ it occurs months/years after-the-fact when the new EU/globalist Tusk takes over. hmmmmm”

From what I can glean, the defendants were convicted of abuse of power in 2015 (thus, their case went through the Polish legal system). They subsequently appealed. Their own political party — and its candidate — came to power and that candidate became president, and pardoned the defendants. A challenge to that pardon was raised and the matter ended up at the Polish Supreme Court, which annulled the pardon and reinstated the case (pending the outcome of the appeal). A “Constitutional Tribunal” dominated by the defendants’ political party claimed the pardon was legal, and should not have been annulled. However, it seems the Polish Supreme Court trumps that tribunal, and the defendants were ultimately convicted last month and sentenced to jail time. They sought sanctuary within the Polish presidential palace.

Here are some articles I found on this matter:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/01/10/europe/poland-pis-arrests-tusk-duda-tensions-intl/index.html

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/top-polish-court-rules-ministers-abuse-power-case-should-be-reopened-2023-06-06/

[Dr. Franklin]

A challenge to that pardon was raised and the matter ended up at the Polish Supreme Court, which annulled the pardon and reinstated the case (pending the outcome of the appeal). A “Constitutional Tribunal” dominated by the defendants’ political party claimed the pardon was legal, and should not have been annulled. However, it seems the Polish Supreme Court trumps that tribunal, and the defendants were ultimately convicted last month and sentenced to jail time.

No in Europe, constitutional courts are the superior courts, although such courts may be jurisdictionally constrained by another body which determines the constitutional courts competence to act (jurisdiction). The constitutional court determines the interactions between the three branches of government. In this case, it declared Duda's pardons valid, and the lower court ignored that ruling, so it will be reversed in short order. It looks like Tusk just wanted to arrest his political opponents, just like the commies and the Bidet Regime here.

[House Atreides]

The EU globalists are going FULL-ON FASCIST. The same thing is happening in Germany with the talk of outlawing the AfD Party. Can’t have parties ACTUALLY standing for the people of a nation, don’t cha know.

[Cronos]

Unfortunately I’m not able to explain it - the intricacies of the legal system on this confuses me as well.

As far as I understand - they were convicted, but then got a Presidential pardon. Leaving aside whether the President (Duda) was right to do so or not), the fact is that he DID pardon them and the President is the highest court of appeal.

The Supreme court cannot - as far as I understand the details of the Polish constitution - overturn a Presidential pardon. To do so is to basically overturn the constitution.

One MAY say (as in many US Presidential pardons), that one disagrees with WHY the incumbent President did that, but it is the President’s prerogative.

[Cronos]

I know you’re being sarcastic, PGR, but as a person who voted Konfederacji (considered “right-wing”, but I’d say more right-ish and definitely patriotic) , I’m just watching this with glee.

Why glee?

Because for 8 years PO (the current party of Tusk) were complaining about “democracy under threat” and having demonstrations about the same. But now we see a definite case of democracy being threatened - Tusk’s hubris in this + the public television debacle have given me lots of ammunition to debate with leftist friends!

[ought-six]

“In this case, it declared Duda’s pardons valid, and the lower court ignored that ruling, so it will be reversed in short order. It looks like Tusk just wanted to arrest his political opponents, just like the commies and the Bidet Regime here.”

It appears the Polish president (as head of state) has exclusive power of pardon. In this instance, it was Duda. The prime minister is head of government; in this case (since December 13, 2023), Tusk. The pardon given by Duda was BEFORE and trial and conviction of the defendants; thus, the Polish Supreme Court held that the pardon was premature and thus invalid, and that the case had to go through the proper courts. The defendants were found guilty and convicted late last year, and sought refuge in the presidential palace (Duda).

So, the question remains: Was the pardon — BEFORE any trial and conviction — legal under Polish law? I think Polish law is clear that the head of state (president) has the exclusive power of pardon. However, legal scholars and other courts challenge whether the president has the right to pardon parties BEFORE a final court ruling in their cases is handed down. In other words — unlike in the US, where the president can issue a pardon at any point after a crime is committed and before, during or after criminal proceedings have taken place — the challenge is that a pardon cannot be awarded to someone who has not been convicted; kind of like the reasoning being: What is there to pardon?

So, maybe you’re right; and maybe you’re not. But, I agree with you that over the years there was a concerted effort to co-opt the Polish courts; however, it appears it was Duda and his party that were responsible for doing that.

I guess we’ll see how all this plays out. It sure as hell has created a big stink in Poland (LOTS of bad blood), and in the EU.

Below is an interesting article about this case, its background, and the process involved; take it for what it’s worth:

https://freedomhouse.org/report/analytical-brief/2018/hostile-takeover-how-law-and-justice-captured-polands-courts

[Dr. Franklin]

So, the question remains: Was the pardon — BEFORE any trial and conviction — legal under Polish law? I think Polish law is clear that the head of state (president) has the exclusive power of pardon. However, legal scholars and other courts challenge whether the president has the right to pardon parties BEFORE a final court ruling in their cases is handed down. In other words — unlike in the US, where the president can issue a pardon at any point after a crime is committed and before, during or after criminal proceedings have taken place — the challenge is that a pardon cannot be awarded to someone who has not been convicted; kind of like the reasoning being: What is there to pardon?

The more relevant point is that the accused appear to have immunity from criminal prosecution as members of the legislature. It's not something we do here in the U.S. or most common law jurisdictions, but in Europe it is common to protect legislators from political prosecution. The Speaker of the lower house revoked their credentials to enable their arrest. That is a political stunt as well. So, there are two large legal problems with these prosecutions. The only limitation I can see in the Polish constitution to the President's pardon powers comes in matters of what we would consider impeachment, the ability to hold office. These guys weren't impeached. It's just ugly political machinations.

[ought-six]

“The more relevant point is that the accused appear to have immunity from criminal prosecution as members of the legislature.”

Interesting. Do you have a source for that?

[ought-six]

Regardless, since Duda has the power of pardon; and now that the defendants have been found guilty, and convicted; why doesn’t Duda now just pardon them, and be done with it? Wouldn’t that comply with Polish law, on all sides?