The biggest revolution in courts and detention centers since 1997. The MPs voted for the changes

Guarantees of the right to defense at an early stage of the case, a ban on the use of illegal evidence, limiting temporary arrests and greater decision-making of courts by limiting the decision-making power of prosecutors – these are the assumed goals of the criminal procedure reform adopted by the Sejm on Friday.

240 MPs voted for the extensive amendment, 174 were against and 20 MPs abstained. Earlier, the Sejm adopted two minor amendments to the amendment by KO. Six amendments by PiS and four amendments by Razem were rejected. Now the adopted changes in criminal procedure will go to the Senate.

Deputy Minister of Justice Arkadiusz Myrcha said this week in the Sejm that the amendment is “one of the largest, if not the largest, comprehensive reform of criminal proceedings since the introduction of the Code of Criminal Procedure in 1997.” – How many times have we heard that we have to do something about the rules of temporary detention. How many times have there been appeals to do something about the fact that the prosecutor in the courtroom has more power than the court – Myrcha pointed out.

According to the assumptions, the reform is intended to encourage courts to use pre-trial detention more prudently – the most severe, isolating preventive measure. Therefore, the regulations contain – as stated – a new, different approach to the possibility of applying pre-trial detention due to the so-called severity of punishment.

Therefore, after the change the upper limit of imprisonment – understood as severe – is to be increased from 8 to 10 years. At the same time, the period of detention under this provision until the court of first instance issues a judgment could not exceed 12 months.

Return to the regulations from before the PiS government

There will also be a return to the regulations from before the PiS government, according to which “temporary arrest cannot be used if the offense is punishable by imprisonment not exceeding 2 years.” During the PiS government, this limit was lowered to one year's imprisonment.

Another important aspect of the proposed changes relates to the current possibility of using the so-called illegal evidence. The currently applicable provision states that “evidence cannot be considered inadmissible solely on the basis that it was obtained in violation of the provisions of procedure or by means of a prohibited act, (…) unless the evidence was obtained in connection with the performance of official duties by a public official as a result of: murder, intentional causing bodily injury or deprivation of liberty.”

However, as the authors of the amendment recalled, such a regulation – as has been repeatedly pointed out – violates the “constitutional principle of acting on the basis of law” and “trust in the state”. Therefore, the Code includes a provision stating that “it is unacceptable to take and use evidence obtained for the purposes of criminal proceedings by means of a prohibited act.”

The amendment also clearly states that “the use of evidence obtained during the application of operational control may only take place in criminal proceedings in the case of a crime or fiscal offense in relation to which the use of such control by any authorized body is permissible.”

The list of changes is long

Other of the numerous changes include: issues related to the European arrest warrant system, use of evidence, confidentiality of contacts between the suspect and his lawyersą, as well as deadlines for filing an appeal.

With regard to the prosecutor's office's power to order exhumation, it was added, for example, that “the person closest to the deceased may lodge a complaint against the decision to remove the body from the grave”, although it will not suspend the action. In turn, interrogations of persons, including suspects who are under 18 years of age, are to be recorded using an image and sound recording device.

During the committee's work, it was also proposed, among others: elimination of the possibility of suspending a lawyer or legal advisor from performing his/her activities solely by decision of the prosecutor. After the change, the prosecutor's office will only be able to request the application of such a preventive measure, while the final decision will be made by the court.

The latter issue was addressed by both KO amendments adopted by the Sejm on Friday – one editorially improved the provision, while the other added a transitional regulation, stating that the suspension of a lawyer or legal advisor made by the prosecutor before the reform entered into force continues to apply “but no longer than for a period of 30 days from the date of entry into force of this Act.” However, any further application of this preventive measure after this deadline could only be based on new regulations.

The proposed solutions are the result of government, commission and parliamentary projects relating to criminal proceedings submitted to the Sejm from 2024. Last fall, eight such projects that passed the first reading stage were combined for joint consideration and then discussed by a parliamentary subcommittee at several meetings. Finally, in mid-December last year, the extraordinary commission for changes in codifications adopted a joint report containing over 40 pages containing new regulations.

Marcin Jabłoński (PAP)

mja/ ugw/