XII K 217/23
AI generated
Court dismisses lustration proceedings against a public official who falsely claimed non-cooperation with security organs.
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe court dismissed the prosecution against J. Ł., a former public official, for failing to meet the strict definition of cooperation with security organs. Although the defendant filled out the lustration declaration incorrectly, the court found he did not actually work or serve in such organs. Consequently, the declaration was deemed truthful under the law, and the state bears the procedural costs.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 17§1 pkt 11 k.p.k.; Art. 414§1 k.p.k.; Art. 19 Ustawy o ujawnianiu informacji o dokumentach organów bezpieczeństwa państwa z lat 1944-1990: A lustration declaration is considered truthful if the declarant did not actually perform service, work, or cooperate with security organs, regardless of clerical errors in the form.
Keywords
AI generated
lustration proceedings
truthful declaration
security organs
procedural dismissal
public official liability
Cited Legislation
AI generatedart. 17§1 pkt 11 k.p.k.
art. 414§1 k.p.k.
art. 19 Ustawy z dnia 18 października 2006 roku o ujawnianiu informacji o dokumentach organów bezpieczeństwa państwa z lat 1944-1990 oraz treści tych dokumentów
art. 632 pkt 2 k.p.k.
art. 17§1 pkt 11 k.p.k
art. 414§1 k.p.k
art. 632 pkt 2 k.p.k
art. 387 k.p.k
art. 51 ust. 4 Konstytucji
art. 212 k.k
Cited Case Law
AI generatedRelated Decisions
AI generatedXII K 88/19
Court finds false disclosure and imposes mandatory disqualification and public office ban under Polish disclosure law.
III K 27/17
Court finds false declaration of truth regarding security service work and imposes disqualification and public office ban.
III KK 258/20
Supreme Court dismisses cassation as obviously unfounded regarding truthful declaration of former Milicia service. Verdict: dismissed.
III KK 11/22
Supreme Court quashes appeal judgment for violating judge appointment law and right to established court.
II NSNk 15/23
Supreme Court dismisses extraordinary appeal as inadmissible due to prior cassation rejection on same merits.