The law must be read in chapters, not in paragraphs, erstwhile said a young individual to an aged individual erstwhile an aged individual was excited by the authorial explanation of 1 paragraph. In addition to this anecdote, it should be added that the younger individual was then a law student, and now passed the exam for a council application. Is that the regulation of attorney? Depends, in college and on applications they had to apply, otherwise they would not become masters of law, but This is completely different in procedural practice.
Anyone, even if not necessarily a lawyer, but a "normal citizen" who saw the proceedings closely, must have noticed that the same lawyer can give a completely different explanation of a circumstantial provision in 1 case, in order to completely deny it in the another case. It all depends solely on what legal interest is at the minute most crucial and who it is to serve. This is clearly seen in the case of Marcin Romanowski and his typical Bartosz Lewandowski. It is no secret that the 2 gentlemen are constantly engaged in a political dispute, in the case of Romanowski it is apparent due to their duties, whereas Lewandowski is simply a "Ziobrists' attorney" who has conducted many cases involving erstwhile employees of the Ministry of Justice.
How much both of you wrote and spoke about the superiority of Polish law over global law, they are most likely incapable to number themselves. The same is actual in the case of over-interpretation or even false explanation of the law by alleged experts. Lewandowski and Romanowski criticized it without mercy, but as shortly as the outside institution unwarrantedly extended the scope of the immunity of the ZPRE, they defended this usurpation with all their might. Moreover, a crucial number of politicians along with the PiS voters were delighted erstwhile the declaration of mass “reporting to Poland” to the Tusk government fell. That was the time it took and that was the business to do. After a fewer months, we know that both the direct participants of this embarrassing action and the political background, the kopecks did not gain and the virtue was lost.
Now another act of the same tragedy takes place and the law again means small erstwhile political and barrister business counts. Mr. Romanowski's defence is of the opinion that the proceedings must be dismissed on the basis of:
Article 17. [Negative procedural grounds]
1. The proceedings shall not be initiated and the proceedings initiated shall be terminated when:
(10) the absence of the required authorisation to prosecute or to search prosecution from the rightholder, unless the law provides otherwise;
The counsellor does not deliberately read the law in chapters and yet pretends that the deleted premise has not been removed. In the current legal state, Mr Marcin Romanowski has 2 immunitys removed and there is no basis for the annulment of proceedings due to the deficiency of authorisation to prosecute. The intention of the legislator was clear, it is not possible to prosecute a fishy if the applicable entity has not given its consent to the waiver of immunity and it is not essential to be a lawyer to make a logical arrangement. More complicated, although it seems apparent at first glance, is the anticipation of re-stopping the suspect. Here Mr Lewandowski in half rightly cites:
Article 248 k.p.k.
3. Retention of a fishy based on the same facts and evidence is unacceptable.
The recipe is clear, but can't Marcin Romanowski be stopped again? In spite of appearances, it is clearly written in this recipe. All it takes is for the facts and/or the charges to change, and for the arrest of the fishy to be legal, under Article 248. For example, the fresh fact may be that Mr. Romanowski will not appear on the call or give his fresh address to what he is obliged to do. On the another hand, the fresh political charge for any prosecutor's office was never a problem, but this time it doesn't make much sense, due to the fact that we should repeat the requests for the waiver of immunity again.
In Poland, it is very hard to talk about the law due to the fact that most of the law does not respect, but there is no problem with passing sentences. utilizing legal rhetoric, it can be assumed in the dark that this column will “sad” the PiS environment, but it will cheer the Strong Together. It is enough, however, to change the names from Romanowski to Giertych and Lewandowski to Dubois, so that the moods besides rapidly change places. Political affairs turn the law into a megaphone in the form of a club, which citizens should know due to the fact that politicians in courts can't defend them, and they can't afford patrons of the majority.
We don't believe in anyone, we don't believe in anything! We look at facts and draw conclusions!
