We recently reported how Adam Bodnar, the Minister of Justice, who is leaving the government, announced that he had appointed Mariusz Ulman, a judge of the District Court in Nysa, as Disciplinary Ombudsman for Judges of Courts of General Jurisdiction, and Tomasz Ładny , a judge of the District Court for Warsaw Praga-Północ in Warsaw, as his deputy. However, we pointed out at the time that these appointments were invalid, as both positions are currently held by judges Piotr Schab and Przemysław Radzik, whose terms of office do not expire until June 2026.
As we have repeatedly stated, the Law on the System of Courts of General Jurisdiction does not contain any provision that would authorise the Minister of Justice to dismiss the Ombudsman or his deputy before the end of their term of office, as the Ministry of Justice itself has admitted. Therefore, even despite his departure from the government, Minister Bodnar must face the fact that for usurping powers not granted to him by any provision of law, he faces criminal liability under Article 231 § 1 of the Criminal Code, which establishes the offence of exceeding powers. In turn, the judges who claim to be the Disciplinary Ombudsman and his deputy may be held liable under Article 227 of the Criminal Code, which penalises impersonating a public official.
The obvious unlawfulness of the Minister’s actions – both the dismissal of Judges Schab and Radzik and the appointment of Judges Ulman and Ładny – was emphasised in the position of the Presidium of the National Council of the Judiciary, published the day before yesterday by the wPolityce portal. The position recalled that:
the decisions of the Minister of Justice of 16 July 2025 appointing Mariusz Ulman as Disciplinary Spokesman for Judges of Courts of General Jurisdiction and Tomasz Ładny as Deputy Spokesman for Judges of Courts of General Jurisdiction are unlawful and have no legal effect, and that they exacerbate the crisis in the justice system caused by earlier decisions and omissions of the Minister of Justice; […] the ineffectiveness of the above appointments results from the fact that Article 112 § 3 of the Act of 27 July 2001 on the organisation of common courts (Journal of Laws of 2024, item 334, as amended) provides for the appointment of one Disciplinary Ombudsman for Judges of Courts of General Jurisdiction and two deputies for a four-year term, with all of the above functions currently being performed by Piotr Schab, Przemysław Radzik and Michał Lasota, respectively, as part of their ongoing, statutory terms of office, which have not expired. It is not possible to appoint other persons to perform the above functions, as the Act does not provide for the simultaneous functioning of two Disciplinary Ombudsmen for Judges of Courts of General Jurisdiction and their three deputies.
The Presidium of the National Council of the Judiciary also obliged the President of the Council to continue to provide Piotr Schab, Przemysław Radzik and Michał Lasota with administrative support within the National Council of the Judiciary and to refrain from providing such support to Mariusz Ulman and Tomasz Ładny. The obligation of the National Council of the Judiciary to provide such services stems from Article 112 § 4 of the Act on the System of Courts of General Jurisdiction:
The National Council of the Judiciary shall provide administrative support to the Disciplinary Ombudsman for Judges of Courts of General Jurisdiction and Deputy Disciplinary Ombudsmen for Judges of Courts of General Jurisdiction by establishing a separate organisational unit within the Office of the National Council of the Judiciary.
In light of the above position, it should come as no surprise that the interested parties themselves – judges Piotr Schab and Przemysław Radzik – declare their willingness to continue performing their functions in accordance with the law.
However, there are legitimate concerns that the Ministry will decide to break the law again and use force to bring its appointees to the KRS headquarters.
A precedent in this regard already took place a year ago. On 3 July 2024, representatives of the National Prosecutor’s Office, accompanied by the police, entered the headquarters of the National Council of the Judiciary, demanding the handover of disciplinary files originally handled by Piotr Schab and Przemysław Radzik, to which Minister Bodnar appointed so-called ad hoc Disciplinary Spokespersons pursuant to Article 112b § 1 of the Law on the System of Courts of General Jurisdiction:
The Minister of Justice may appoint a Disciplinary Ombudsman of the Minister of Justice to conduct a specific case concerning a judge. The appointment of a Disciplinary Ombudsman of the Minister of Justice excludes any other ombudsman from taking action in the case.
As the Disciplinary Ombudsman for Judges of Courts of General Jurisdiction was absent from the National Council of the Judiciary at the time, the Public Prosecutor’s Office ordered the breaking open of the cabinets containing the files in question.
This action drew justified criticism from, among others, Professor Ryszard Piotrowski, who described it as irrational and disproportionate and found significant abuses.
As a side note, it should be noted that the Constitutional Tribunal is currently considering a motion submitted by the National Council of the Judiciary to declare the institution of ad hoc ombudsmen unconstitutional. The Tribunal issued a protective order in this case on 8 January 2025, in which it ordered the suspension of any activities by the ad hoc ombudsmen. In connection with the above, the Disciplinary Ombudsman for Judges of Courts of General Jurisdiction, Judge Piotr Schab, demanded the return of the files taken from him in July. However, in accordance with the current (unlawful) practice of the government of ignoring all actions of the Constitutional Tribunal, the ad hoc ombudsmen did not comply with the interim measure or meet Judge Schab’s request.
The near future will show whether Minister Bodnar’s successor will also decide to use the methods developed by his predecessor in the matter of filling the position of Disciplinary Ombudsman for Judges of Courts of General Jurisdiction. For the time being, unfortunately, there are no signs that the government reshuffle will result in a change of course with regard to violations of the fundamental principles of the rule of law.
Image source: Wikipedia.
