On Tuesday morning, the Chamber of Professional Responsibility did not stop to detain Judge Igor Tuleya and bring him for questioning to the prosecutor’s office. Thus, she upheld the Disciplinary Chamber itself in this case. The Chamber also vacated after the judge was suspended and his salary was reduced.

The prosecutor’s office wants to take advantage of Tuleya’s allegations of unlawful access to information regarding the proceedings in the case of the Sejm in the Column Hall of December 16, 2016, which include those discontinued by the prosecutor’s office. In December 2017, the District Court in Warsaw, chaired by Judge Tuleya, annulled the prosecutor’s office for the first discontinuation of the proceedings. The judge then allowed the oral justification of the court’s decision to be recorded. According to the prosecutor’s office, it was exposed to further lead.

As pointed out by the Supreme Court, a judge by such behavior cannot commit a crime while observing the law within his powers. Piece. 95b § 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure states that “the meeting is held ex officio, unless the act provides otherwise or the president of the court or the court orders otherwise”, which clearly confirms the competence of the court to rule on open conduct of the office. The position to be confirmed also in the previous jurisprudence of the Supreme Court (see resolution of 28 March 2012, reference number I KZP 26/11). In this state of affairs, it does not occur, and the suspicion of committing a crime under Art. 241 § 1 of the Penal Code, if the proceedings of the prosecutor’s office are manifestly unfounded – we read in the letter of the Supreme Court.

In addition, the Supreme Court decided to suspend the judge from his duties and reduce his remuneration by 25% for the duration of the suspension.

As we read in the letter, this decision was made pursuant to Art. 9 of the Act of June 9, 2022 amending the Act on the Supreme Court and certain other acts. It should be emphasized that this provision was applied by the Supreme Court for the first time. – Recognizing the ambiguity of the indicated norm, the Supreme Court additionally should take into account the functional inseparability of the proceedings in connection with detention and forcibly brought, and the proceedings in connection with criminal liability, as well as the nature of the supported 276 Code of Criminal Procedure – explained.

It was also noted that the Supreme Court took into account the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights regarding the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court (abolished on 15 July this year).

The resolution is final, however, as emphasized in the letter, Judge Igor Tuleya remains “subject to criminal proceedings under the resolution of November 18, 2020, the ruling of which may be challenged as a result of Art. 18 of the quoted Act of June 9, 2022, at the request of the judge.

ref. no. II ZIZ 4/22