The ridicule of names, convictions, speeches or even individual attacks on individuals for their activity in public life is an online reality, which unfortunately is actively attended by judges. Is that good for them? erstwhile again, there was an thought for the National Judicial Council to deal with this issue. It is to prepare a code of ethics for a justice in social media.
Speak up, not insult
Such a commitment was made at the last KRS meeting. They were brought up by a discussion about the entry of Mark Jaskulski, a associate of the Council, on the name of 1 of the judges speaking in the public debate. For the author of the statement, this may even be a discipliner. As a result, the Committee on Professional Ethics of judges and asessors of the KRS is to prepare a draft Code of Ethics for judges utilizing social media. Its president is justice Rafał Puchalski. Judges are a large number of net users – more than half of them usage Facebook, Twitter, etc.
Dagmara Pawełczyk-Woicka, president of the KRS, says that since the behaviour of judges in social media raises doubts and goes beyond the framework of good education, it is worth preparing specified a code.
– This is simply a discussion for the future. Certainly, the present neo-KRS should not be afraid with the preparation of specified regulations, although I do not regulation out that specified rules would be useful – says the Krakow justice Waldemar Żurek, who was repeatedly attacked on the Internet.
– surely no longer a committee headed by a justice suspected of participating in the alleged hater scandal, which in 2019 broke out in the judicial environment, and consisted of discrediting uncomfortable judges, adds another judge.
Maciej Nawacki, president of the Olsztyn territory Court and associate of the KRS, is powerfully active in social media. erstwhile he asks if he needs a fresh code, he says no.
– The principles of judicial ethics are mostly codified. They besides include rules on the participation of judges in social media – he believes. And he adds that all he has to do is follow them and enforce them. “No changes are needed,” he says.
But not everyone seems clear.
– In the current principles of judicial ethics, there is only a very general message that a justice who participates in these media should be restrained. It's a beautiful general rule. However, we have various examples that clearly show that this is not restraint. Here is the crown example of justice Krystyna Pavlowicz, who writes things that can be defined differently, but surely cannot be attributed to restraint," says justice Michał Laskowski of the ultimate Court.
There are many more examples of this, although it states that it does not keep track of specified activities. He asks, however, whether this can be full and specifically regulated, due to the fact that specified matters are so extended and varied that they may not be possible. However, there is no uncertainty that these issues should not be dealt with by the current KRS.
– First you gotta choose a body according to the law and then entrust it with circumstantial tasks that are crucial for the environment – says justice Laskowski.
Back to the Past
For the first time, Zbigniew Ziobro came in August 2019. This was just after the alleged hatred crime.
– The dignity of a justice is simply a large privilege, but besides limitations. 1 of them should become a rule of peculiar restraint in the usage of social media," he stressed. The code was to contain regulations that would prevent judges from violating the principles of apoliticalism. Ziobro commissioned the preparation of the KRS code at the time.
Why didn't the code be created?
– At the time we had much more crucial matters to attend to,” says Leszek Mazur, then president of the KRS. This was the time right after the alleged hatred crime. “It would not be serious if, at a time erstwhile the case was in the prosecutor’s office, you were to compose a code of ethics online,” he says.
Wiesław Kozielewicz, Supreme Court Judge, president of the Chamber of Professional Responsibility
In my opinion, there is no request for further government on the activity of judges in social media. We can't keep up with technology anyway. After all, there are fresh opportunities to participate in the discussion online. The problem is the content. We have a set of principles of the judge's ethics, which each of us who hold the office must bear in mind, taking the level in the discussion. If we add the case law, very rich, due to the fact that it is not only the case law of the Chamber of Professional Responsibility, but besides of the general courts, it should be clear. The Code plus jurisprudence sets standards for judges' behaviour erstwhile it comes to their online statements. Anything that fits beyond the standards is an abuse. And that's to be fought, enforced. Since the introduction of fresh regulations, the situation will not improve.
