Like many, I had doubts about going to a demonstration on June 4. And like many, I stopped having them due to Lex Tusk. We gotta go, unfortunately.
I believe in the natural goodness of human nature and so I say many writers do not know what is in this bill. After all, the message of the day from Nowogrodzka is "in France they besides set up a parliamentary committee, and the Platform besides wanted to appoint it".
OK, but did anyone, too the Scriptures, do it through a peculiar bill? After all, Parliaments in different countries have their own rules to appoint committees of inquiry. Why the bill?
If I were to receive this honor and comment on a PiS supporter, I would be very grateful for the answer to that question. WHAT IS IT? Why could no average committee of enquiry be established (as in France, which Morawiecki refers to?).
My hypothesis – and I will gladly retreat from it, if I know another, more convincing – is that researching Russian influences is just a pretext to introduce regulations from which baldness is used. They make this commission a prosecutor, court and executioner (no defenders like Bolsheviks).
The Commission may decide ‘to prohibit public funds for up to 10 years’. He can do so in secret on the basis of his visions – he does not gotta justify or even explain on the basis of which evidence he considered a Russian agent.
Formally, it is not a conviction or punishment, it is an administrative decision. Consequently, there is no presumption of innocence or of the right of defence – however, we will agree unless a ten-year ban on serving is simply a de facto punishment.
I hear the committee's decision can be appealed. Well, that's great, but is it the decision to "apply the measure" too?
Will it be possible to appeal to the meritum ("provide its innocence", which is already scandalous in itself), or will it stay only to search out any formal flaws that "there is no signature"? I don't know, and the government is not doing anything to dispel these doubts (the answer “a committee was besides formed in France” does not dispel them).
It seems that before the election they want to weaken the opposition, preventing its leaders from running. After all, the parliamentary mandate is besides "the function of having public funds".
I'm not any large Donald Tusk enthusiast, but I'm an enthusiast of general regulation of law. This committee is breaking them.
When the Law and Justice came to power 8 years ago, the right wing fantasized about planting Tusk. A typical right in 2015 could believe that he could prove any crime – due to the fact that they reportedly "stealed" for him, and in addition he nailed the turtle with Putin.
For 8 years, PiS controls the D.A.'s office, secret services, has its neo-judges. And no trial, no conviction, and trying to find something on Tusk by the Amber Gold Parliamentary committee ended with Suski being ridiculed.
If they couldn't find any evidence, they called themselves a commission so constructed that they didn't even gotta look for it. A hooded court at a secret sitting “a ruling measure”. Reason? It's classified, too.
That's how you take down anyone. Whatever, guilty or not guilty. It is adequate that not with the Law and Justice (its committee will not, of course, move).
Don't they dare? Maybe. But that partially depends on attendance on the march.
Therefore, although I do not like demonstrations and although (have I already marked it?) I do not like Tuski, I go. This is not the time to halt Legierski, that “let’s give them a chance.” Lex Tusk dispels all doubts about their intentions.
