A former Polish minister and his deputy risk jail time in a controversial case that showcased the chaos surrounding the current state of the judicial system in Poland and that it is already creating conflict between the new government and current President Andrzej Duda.
The case involves former Interior Minister Mariusz Kaminski and his deputy Maciej Wasik. The two were found guilty of abuse of power while heading a governmental anti-corruption agency. However, in 2015 president Duda pardoned them, before the case went on to a final ruling before an appeals court. Eventually, in 2023 Poland’s Supreme Court ruled that the case should be reopened.
Last December Kaminski and Wasik were then sentenced to two years in prison. A Warsaw court had already prepared documentation to send them to prison. According to some lawyers and the speaker of the Sejm, Poland’s low chamber, Szymon Holownia the December ruling meant that Kaminski and Wasik lost their parliamentary mandates. Both have been elected MPs in last elections. However, both refused to comply and said that they plan to attend the next parliamentary sitting.
Also Duda supports the two fellow party-members. He said on Monday that his pardon should still stand to clear the duo of any wrongdoing. The head of the presidential office even invited the two to the presidential palace, as part of the appointment ceremony for new advisors.
Duda and the two defendants are all member of former ruling party Law and Justice (PiS). Fellow PiS member Rafal Bochenek on social media criticized the court decision, calling it “scandalous and outrageous”.
The chaos surrounding the case is symptomatic of the issues around the judicial system, after PiS made several reforms that questioned the rule-of-law in the country and drew harsh criticism by the European Union. The appeal on invalidating the mandates of the two should be heard by the Labour Law Chamber. However, the defendants wanted it to be made by the Chamber of Extraordinary Control, a chamber created by PiS while in government and whose judges were appointed in controversial fashion.
