Search

The author r00t🇪🇺 accused Bogucki of selective representation of the Constitutional Tribunal's ruling from December 3, 2015, in case K 34/15. He pointed out that Article 194, paragraph 1 of the Constitution entrusts the Sejm with the election of judges of the Tribunal, while the obligation to take an oath before the President results from the law. He referred to points 8.5.1, 8.5.3, and 8.6 of the justification. As he wrote, the Tribunal considered the oath to be an element added by the legislator to the constitutional procedure, and its acceptance by the President was regarded as an obligation. He added that the Tribunal questioned the interpretation of provisions that would not foresee the immediate taking of an oath. The author assessed that the President does not approve the choice made by the Sejm and cannot, based on statutory competence, co-decide on the composition of the Tribunal. He accused Bogucki of omitting parts of the ruling and using it to provoke opposition to the government and to present its actions as an attack on the constitutional order. Referring to Karol Nawrocki, the author reminded that Article 126, paragraph 1 of the Constitution defines the President of the Republic of Poland as the highest representative of the state and the guarantor of continuity of power, while paragraph 3 indicates that he performs his tasks on the principles specified in the Constitution and laws. He wrote that using the authority of the Constitution to justify a political position does not correspond to those obligations. #Konstytucja #Prawo #Polityka (translated)

Piotr Kusznieruk accused Wielowieyska of accepting the police's version as an established fact and assessing the detained individual before the court's decision. He questioned the legal basis for identifying the man who — as he wrote — was calmly standing at the crosswalk, as well as the attempt to take him aside. He asked whether the refusal to provide personal information justified intervention. Kusznieruk noted that pushing away the officers and fleeing did not exempt the assessment of the legality and proportionality of the force used. He also pointed out the choking of the subdued individual, the vulgarities and threats that — as he wrote — were audible on the recording, and questioned whether such behavior was within the standards of human rights. He added that the court had refused to detain the man, and according to the defense, it concluded that the prosecutor had not even demonstrated a high probability of the alleged act being committed. He characterized this as more than just a routine refusal of detention. He deemed the attribution of a crisis to the detainee based on his behavior as public stigmatization. He also believed that publicly presenting him as an aggressor before the court's decision could be seen as incitement, and that journalists should monitor power, rather than act as its spokesperson. #prawaCzłowieka #Polska #policja (translated)

Bartosz Malewski informed that the court did not grant the prosecution's request for a month of temporary detention for Piotr. According to Malewski, the prosecutor justified the request with concerns that Piotr might hide and an assessment that there is a high probability of him committing further crimes. Malewski wrote that together with lawyers Magda Prządka and Magda Majkowska, he convinced the court that there were no grounds for imposing detention. He claimed that it was not sufficiently substantiated that Piotr had committed the alleged acts and that Friday's events should be treated as an incident requiring thorough explanation. According to Malewski, Piotr has a permanent place of residence, is socially engaged, and is a firefighter in the volunteer fire department, so there is no real risk that he would hide. He added that after the defenders reached him, Piotr, feeling safer, started limited cooperation with the authorities. Malewski also emphasized that the lack of cooperation is Piotr's right and should not be a basis for preventive measures. Malewski also assessed that the forecast for further criminal activity had no rational basis. He wrote that Piotr had not been convicted and that his behavior on Friday was not aimed at committing the alleged acts, which, in Malewski's view, undermined the legal qualification adopted by the prosecution. He informed that the court did not apply other preventive measures, such as police supervision, and that Piotr would respond to the charges at liberty. He added that assistance was provided as part of a procedural intervention by Ordo Iuris. #wolność #sprawiedliwość #prawo (translated)

The author of the entry r00t wrote that the document commented on by Wójcik contradicted his assertion that Maciej Berek did not meet the formal requirements. According to the author, the Chancellery of the Sejm indicated that the application with Berek's candidacy was submitted on time by an eligible entity and contained the required elements, after which it was referred to the Justice and Human Rights Committee. The author added that during the committee meeting, Berek's performance of the legal advisor profession was discussed, and the candidate answered questions. The committee positively assessed his candidacy. r00t accused Wójcik of ignoring the course of the procedure and the documents, which — as he wrote — indicated something contrary to his assertion. #Polska #Prawo #KomisjaSprawiedliwości (translated)

This road is very busy, its width parameters are at the limit in some places, perhaps even beyond the limit. Technically, it will be a demanding construction, as builders will construct retaining and support walls over 700 meters long, widen and modify three intersections, and two new bridges or sound barriers will also be built. “This road is very busy, its width parameters are at the limit in some places, perhaps even beyond the limit,” appreciated the reconstruction of the main route by the mayor of Třebíč, Pavel Pacal (For Třebíč). #Třebíč #Dukovany #silničnístavby (translated)

Press reports stated that Presse Océan described the rally held in Nantes on October 17 as a "record demonstration." According to the newspaper, over 20,000 people had demonstrated according to the authorities, and more than 30,000 according to the organizers. The newspaper indicated that the call against the high cost of living had transformed into a general protest against government policy, which was quickly repressed. #17octobre #Nantes #Manif #Politique (translated)

The Stock Information published a Sunday summary, stating that Polish diplomats were attacked in Israel, and the USA offered Russia the sale of gas to Europe in exchange for a share in profits. According to the post, riots broke out in large cities of Portugal and Albania and in Milan, while in France they affected 400 cities and indicated a loss of control over the situation. The author cited data from the French Ministry of the Interior about 550,000 demonstrators and AFP about 880,000, also mentioning heatmaps. Among other information, the author noted that 7% of the world's population had cryptocurrencies, homes in the USA were the least affordable in history, deliveries of Abrams tanks to Poland were coming to an end, and Biedronka and Lidl were not once in the top three cheapest stores. He also mentioned that the Kremlin announced the imminent announcement of new USA-Russia agreements, while Elon Musk considered AI and robots the only way to repair the USA. According to the post, Iran announced the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, and three tankers were on fire; Volodymyr Zelensky warned that in the event of Ukraine's collapse, 20 million of its residents would flee to the EU. The author also wrote about the intensifying fighting on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border and quoted Pete Hegseth's words about the largest military buildup by China in the Pacific. He asked the audience for their assessment of bottle return machines, and on the occasion of Tie Day, he posted a joke about pasta made from threads. #Świat #Wydarzenia #Polityka (translated)

Piotr Kusznieruk accused Professor Sadurski of condemning the journalist's vulgar comment more strongly than the convicted politician he defends received a five-year prison sentence for crimes involving corruption. He pointed out that the sentence is not legally binding, but in his view, that does not justify disregarding the findings of the first-instance court. Kusznieruk wrote that Sadurski has the right to criticize uncivil language, but he should also address the seriousness of the actions determined by the court. He added that Sadurski's membership in the Venice Commission remains significant when assessing his public statements, although he does not speak on behalf of that institution. He also criticized the closure of discussions under the pretext of fighting trolls, arguing that it is difficult to reconcile that with openness to arguments. #Polska #korupcja #debata (translated)