1

The Ordo Iuris Institute, together with the Nationwide Association of Judges “Sędziowie RP” (Judges of the Republic of Poland), the Independent Association of Prosecutors “Ad Vocem,” the Lawyers for Poland Association, the association Veritas et Ius – In the Service of the Nation, and the Warsaw Seminar on the Axiology of Administration, has issued a joint position statement on Poland’s Academy of Justice.

2

The signatories point out that the Academy of Justice (AWS) — despite its status as a university of the state services and its supervision by the Minister of Justice — remains a higher-education institution whose autonomy is guaranteed by Art. 70(5) of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland and by the Law on Higher Education and Science.

3

Dismissing the Rector-Commandant under Art. 432(5) of that law requires demonstrating a gross or persistent violation of the law; the ministry’s allegations do not meet that standard.

4

The organizations criticize the disregard of the position of the AWS Senate, doubts about the proper service of the decision, the downplaying of an interim measure issued by Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal, and the refusal to allow civil-society organizations and trade unions to take part in the proceedings.

5

The associations call on the Minister of Justice to immediately abandon actions that violate the autonomy of the AWS and to fully respect procedural standards.

Six legal organizations have issued a joint position statement concerning the actions taken by the Ministry of Justice against the Academy of Justice (AWS) and its Rector-Commandant, Dr. Michał Sopiński. The document was signed by attorney Jerzy Kwaśniewski (the Ordo Iuris Institute), attorney Krzysztof Wąsowski (the Warsaw Seminar on the Axiology of Administration in Warsaw), Judge Zygmunt Drożdżejko (the Nationwide Association of Judges “Sędziowie RP”), Judge Łukasz Piebiak (Lawyers for Poland), Paweł Wilkoszewski (the Independent Association of Prosecutors “Ad Vocem”), and Judge Piotr Schab (Veritas et Ius – In the Service of the Nation). The signatories regard the ministry’s actions as violating fundamental constitutional principles, the statutory guarantees of a higher-education institution’s autonomy, and rule-of-law standards.

In the first part of the statement, the organizations recall that the autonomy of higher-education institutions is grounded in Art. 70(5) of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland and in the Law on Higher Education and Science. The AWS, despite its status as a university of the state services and the Minister of Justice’s supervision arising from the Prison Service Act, remains a higher-education institution, and the minister’s supervision may not take the form of arbitrary, politically motivated interference in the powers of its bodies, in particular its Senate.

The second part concerns the unlawfulness of the dismissal itself. The legal basis — Art. 432(5) of the Law on Higher Education and Science — requires demonstrating a gross or persistent violation of the law, which, in the signatories’ assessment, the ministry’s allegations do not satisfy. The organizations further point to three troubling procedural circumstances: doubts about the proper service of the decision, the downplaying of an interim measure granted by the Constitutional Tribunal, and the refusal to allow civil-society organizations and trade unions to participate in the proceedings.

The third part warns against the instrumentalization of supervision. A university that trains personnel for the Prison Service and the justice system requires stability, predictability, and protection from political fluctuations, and criticism of the actions of public authorities or the taking of positions on systemic questions cannot automatically be classified as “demonstrative political activity” that disqualifies a person from holding an academic office.

The document closes with an appeal to the Minister of Justice: to immediately abandon actions that violate the autonomy of the AWS, to fully respect the interim measures of the Constitutional Tribunal and procedural standards, and to ensure that any proceedings against the university’s authorities are conducted with the highest guarantees of integrity, transparency, and independence from short-term political interests.

OPEN THE STATEMENT (PDF)  Download  (in Polish)

Below we publish the full text of the statement:

Position statement of the legal organizations concerning the actions taken by the Ministry of Justice against the Academy of Justice and its Rector-Commandant, Dr. Michał Sopiński

The associations note with the utmost concern the announcement and the actions of the Ministry of Justice concerning the Academy of Justice (AWS) and the attempt to dismiss Dr. Michał Sopiński from the office of Rector-Commandant. We regard these actions as violating fundamental constitutional principles, the statutory guarantees of a higher-education institution’s autonomy, and rule-of-law standards.

1. The autonomy of a higher-education institution as a constitutional and statutory value

The Constitution of the Republic of Poland (Art. 70(5)) and the Law on Higher Education and Science guarantee higher-education institutions autonomy in matters of organization, management, and the selection of their authorities. The Academy of Justice, despite its status as a university of the state services and the Minister of Justice’s supervision arising from the Prison Service Act, remains a higher-education institution within the meaning of the higher-education legislation. The supervision exercised by the minister may not take the form of arbitrary, politically motivated interference in the powers of the institution’s bodies, in particular its Senate.

Attempts to challenge the exclusive competence of the academic bodies to appoint and dismiss the rector, as well as the taking of supervisory decisions that bypass or run counter to the position of the AWS Senate, constitute an impermissible violation of that autonomy. Autonomy is not a privilege but a guarantee of the independence of scholarship and teaching from short-term political interests. A public university — including one of the state services — cannot be treated as a tool of ongoing political struggle.

2. The unlawfulness of the dismissal proceedings against the Rector-Commandant

A decision to dismiss the Rector-Commandant under Art. 432(5) of the Law on Higher Education and Science requires demonstrating a gross or persistent violation of the law. The allegations formulated by the ministry (procedural irregularities in doctoral proceedings, public activity, a dispute concerning a contract for the probation officer traineeship) do not meet — in the organizations’ assessment — the standard of “gross and persistent” violations that would justify such a drastic intervention.

The procedural circumstances are especially troubling:

  • questions concerning the proper service of the decision in accordance with the Code of Administrative Procedure;
  • the existence of an interim measure granted by the Constitutional Tribunal, of whose binding force both the party and the supervisory body had been informed;
  • the refusal to allow civil-society organizations and trade unions to participate in the proceedings despite their standing arising from the public and statutory interest.

These actions raise serious doubts as to whether the standards of fair administrative procedure and the party’s right to a defense have been observed. Publicly announcing the effects of a decision before it has been properly served, and downplaying the Constitutional Tribunal’s interim measure, undermines confidence in the rule of law.

3. The impermissibility of instrumentalizing supervision

The AWS trains personnel for the Prison Service and the justice system. Its mission requires stability, predictability, and protection from political fluctuations. Using supervisory powers to remove an institution’s authorities amid disputes of a systemic and political nature (including those concerning the status of judicial bodies) leads to the erosion of confidence in institutions and violates the principle of legality.

The organizations emphasize that criticism of the actions of public authorities, statements in public debate, or the taking of positions on systemic questions cannot automatically qualify as “demonstrative political activity” that disqualifies a person from holding an academic office — especially where this concerns persons who are exercising their constitutional right to freedom of speech and participation in public life.

4. Appeal

We call on the Minister of Justice to:

  • immediately abandon actions that violate the autonomy of the AWS;
  • fully respect the interim measures of the Constitutional Tribunal and procedural standards;
  • ensure that any proceedings against the institution’s authorities are conducted with the highest guarantees of integrity, transparency, and independence from short-term political interests.

The autonomy of higher-education institutions, including universities of the state services, is one of the pillars of a democratic state governed by the rule of law. Violating it — regardless of the political colors of those currently in power — is impermissible and must meet with the firm opposition of the legal community.

Signatories:

Attorney Jerzy Kwaśniewski (the Ordo Iuris Institute)

Attorney Krzysztof Wąsowski (the Warsaw Seminar on the Axiology of Administration in Warsaw)

Judge Zygmunt Drożdżejko (the Nationwide Association of Judges “Sędziowie RP”)

Judge Łukasz Piebiak (Lawyers for Poland)

Paweł Wilkoszewski (the Independent Association of Prosecutors “Ad Vocem”)

Judge Piotr Schab (Veritas et Ius – In the Service of the Nation)

See also:

Source of cover photo: iStock