In respective accessible sentences, justice Włodzimierz Wróbel explained the question of the regulation of law in Poland.1. You can be a hunting judge, a sports justice or just a justice within the meaning of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland
2. A justice within the meaning of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland shall be only a person:
a. appointed by the president of the Republic of Poland,
b. at the request of the National Judicial Council,
c. indefinitely (exception – Constitutional Court).
3. The erstwhile ruling squad in 2018 liquidated the constitutional body of the National Judicial Council. This place was followed by a legislative creation – pseudo (with Greek – alleged) National Judicial Council – subordinate to politicians.
4. The president continued to hand out appointments for judges, only without the National Judicial Council's proposal. As a result, people who became judges not under the Constitution but by the law that created the pseudo-KRS entered the judicial system.
5. The position of these "statutory" judges is the same as those reinstated at about the same time in the judiciary of the judicial assistants. Neither the ‘statutory judge’ nor the court asessor knows the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, and only the bill created it. And what was created by the bill can be abolished by the bill.
6. Constitutional guarantees of non-elimination, of the state of remainder or immunity are granted only to the judges referred to in the Constitution. The judges of the ‘statutory’, like the judicial assessors, were given specified powers solely by the law. And what was created by the bill can besides be abolished by the bill.
7. The abolition of the function of a "statutory" judge, i.e. a justice appointed to office by the president without the request of the National Judicial Council, on a proposal from the pseudo-KRS, does not consequence in automatic repeal of decisions given by specified a justice (or with his involvement) (as the judgments of the Assessors were not annulled, although the Constitutional Tribunal at the time considered that it was an unconstitutional institution and that position in the judiciary was abolished).
8. If a statutory office or function is liquidated, the persons who exercise this office or function are mostly guaranteed their professional rights (e.g. the right to cash clearance, the right to take another position, etc. But the limit to the protection of various rights acquired is to get them in bad faith, knowing that this was made possible by the unconstitutional actions of politicians.
9. The amendment of the Act on the National Judicial Council, which created a "statutory" judge, was part of the unconstitutional submission by the politicians of the courts, the Constitutional Court, the prosecution. At that time, the ultimate Court judges were removed from office, non-constitutional peculiar courts were established to repress independent lawyers, provisions of the mutiny Act were implemented. A lawyer who claims that he did not know and did not realize all of this should alternatively be relegated to college alternatively than admitted to a competition for a judgeship.
10. No 1 was forced to participate in competitions run by the pseudoKRS (except possibly asessors for whom it was a necessity of life). Nor were there penalties for refusing to sign a letter of support for political denominations to the pseudo-KRS. Meanwhile, all presidential nomination adopted deepened chaos in the judiciary. And the lawyers were well aware of this, knowing the content of the decisions of the ultimate Court, the ultimate Administrative Court or the European Courts.”
