- Judge Majcher from the District Court in Opole was to be responsible for the alleged failure to fulfill obligations, i.e. under Art. 231 of the Penal Code The judge rules in the department of the National Court Register
- All because she did not “force” the company from Opole to register with the National Court Register. Companies had a certain time to re-register – if they did not do so, they could lose their property to the Treasury
- One of the companies in the Opole region failed to fulfill this obligation and lost its property – now it blames Judge Majcher for it. The company’s opinion is shared by the prosecutor’s office, which believes that a judge should impose a fine on the company in order to mobilize it to act
- – Judge Majcher applied the law in force, and they wanted to make a criminal out of her. This is a curiosity – judge Katarzyna Kałwak from the Opole branch of “Iustitia” tells Onet
- More information can be found on the Onet.pl home page
The Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court upheld the resolution of the Wrocław Disciplinary Court at the Court of Appeal, which refused to revoke Judge Majcher’s immunity. This means that the prosecution will not be able to prosecute the judge for alleged failure to fulfill his duties.
Although the persons supporting Judge Majcher, gathered before the Supreme Court, consider the decision to be right, they also emphasize that the Disciplinary Chamber operates against the decision of the CJEU.
On April 8, 2020, the European Court of Justice ruled that this Chamber is to immediately suspend its activities related to disciplining judges, because it does not meet the requirements for European courts. The then First President of the Supreme Court, prof. Małgorzata Gersdorf immediately implemented the CJEU’s decision, and the Disciplinary Chamber did not receive files of cases submitted to the Supreme Court. Only that when the term of office of prof. Gersdorf has come to an end, in May the temporary head of SN Kamil Zaradkiewicz “frostbitten” the activities of the Disciplinary Chamber.
Judge Irena Majcher did not appear before the Disciplinary Chamber today, the state of her health did not allow it. Moreover, it does not consider that Chamber a court within the meaning of EU law. There was a group of lawyers supporting the judge, including judge Igor Tuleyawhose immunity will be decided by the Supreme Court on Thursday, October 22.
–
We support judge Irena Majcher – a picket in front of the Supreme Court
–
–
Judge Majcher and the criminal charges?
20 years ago, the Sejm obliged companies to register with the National Court Register. It replaced the Commercial Register B (RHB), which was established in 1919. As it turns out, one of the Opole companies failed to fulfill this obligation and, as a consequence, lost ownership of the property, which was transferred to the State Treasury.
The company blamed judge Irena Majcher for this situation, adjudicating in the KRS division of the Opole District Court. The company’s opinion was shared by the prosecutor’s office, who decided that the judge should at least initiate proceedings to force the company to register with the National Court Register. It should also – had it not happened – imposed a fine on the company. As Judge Majcher did not do it, the prosecutor accused her of failing to fulfill her obligations, i.e. an act under Art. 231 of the Penal Code
The first instance disciplinary court has already spoken on this matter. The disciplinary court at the Court of Appeal in Wrocław refused to waive the judge’s immunity, but the prosecutor’s office appealed to the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court.
In this case, sharp resolutions were prepared by judges from the District Court in Opole. They indicate that it was the company in question that failed to fulfill the obligation to register with the National Court Register, so it is the company – and not the judge – that should be responsible for these shortcomings. The judges also emphasize that the charges against Judge Majcher were brought without obtaining any explanations from her, without hearing her version of the events and without an investigation.
“We perceive this as an unprecedented attack on the independence of a judge,” write judges from the Opole SR judges.
“Show the judge’s head”
– It is a curiosity that an attempt was made to accuse the judge of complying with the applicable law – judge Katarzyna Kałwak from the Opole branch of “Iustitia” tells Onet.
– The law on the National Court Register was harmful to many entities and too restrictive. However, this does not change the fact that this is the law, and judge Majcher simply applied it in her decision. This is the duty of every judge – underlines.
– The question arises why the application of the law in force would make the judge a criminal? Apparently, the prosecutor’s office must have been particularly interested in this – judge Kałwak tells us. – After all, showing this “head of the judge” who will be accused by the prosecutor’s office is a simple way to obtain compensation from the State Treasury for a given company – he explains.
Judge Kałwak also emphasizes that the judge’s actions cannot be challenged for not treating companies as his subordinates. – It is not the role of the court to run companies by the hand and show them how to behave – judge Kałwak tells us.
– Entrepreneurs had time to re-register companies with the National Court Register, they knew what the responsibility was. If they did not, then the fault lies with them, not with the court – he explains.
Michał Walendzik, delegated from the District Prosecutor’s Office in Rawa Mazowiecki to the Internal Affairs Department of the National Public Prosecutor’s Office, established in 2016 by Zbigniew Ziobro, wanted to bring charges against judge Majcher.
In mid-September, Walendzik visited judge Beata Morawiec, president of the “Themis” Association, to take her official laptop and pen drive with the judge.
–
