[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?