This is good news for everyone who protested and intends to continue protesting against the Law and Justice government and against the ruling of Julia Przyłębska's Constitutional Tribunal restricting abortion rights in Poland.
In December 2020, the teenagers were questioned at the District Police Headquarters in Lwówek Śląski in connection with the alleged organization of the Women's Strike in Lwówek. According to the law enforcement authorities, the girls committed an offense under Article 52 of the Act of May 20, 1971, the Code of Petty Offenses (Journal of Laws 2019.0.821, consolidated text).
On March 11, 2021, the District Court in Lwówek Śląski discontinued the proceedings. It found that the act did not bear the characteristics of an offense.
The State Treasury was charged with the costs of the proceedings.
Both teenagers were provided with legal assistance. They were represented by the Law Office of Attorney Piotr Klebanowicz. They were also supported by friends from the Bolesławiec Women's Strike.
Court decision
Case reference no. II W 579/20 RSOW 1166/20
Decision
on March 11, 2021, the District Court in Lwówek Śląski, Second Criminal Division, composed of: Presiding Judge Justyna Krzysztofik-Skrzydłowska, Court Clerk Judyta XXX, without the participation of the parties, having considered on March 11, 2021, the case against Julia XXX and Izabela XXX, accused of an offense under Article 52 § 2 points 2 and 3 of the Code of Petty Offenses, ex officio regarding the discontinuation of the proceedings, hereby rules
- pursuant to Article 5 § 1 point 2 of the Code of Procedure in Petty Offense Cases, to discontinue the proceedings in the case
- pursuant to Article 119 § 2 point 1 of the Code of Procedure in Petty Offense Cases, to charge the State Treasury with the costs of the proceedings.
Reasons
In an application for punishment submitted to the Court on January 26, 2021, by the District Police Headquarters in Lwówek Śląski, Julia XXX and Izabela XXX were accused of committing an offense under Article 52 § 2 points 2 and 3 of the Code of Petty Offenses, consisting in organizing an assembly without the required notification in the town of Lwówek Śląski on December 1, 2020, and presiding over the aforementioned assembly after it had been dissolved.
In a letter dated March 2, 2021, the Mayor of the Municipality and Town of Lwówek Śląski informed the Court that the Municipality had not been notified of the intention to organize a public assembly under the Act of July 24, 2015, the Law on Assemblies.
Pursuant to Article 5 § 1 point 2 of the Code of Procedure in Petty Offense Cases, proceedings are not initiated, and initiated proceedings are discontinued, when the act does not bear the characteristics of an offense or the law provides that the perpetrator has not committed an offense.
Julia XXX and Izabela XXX, minors aged 17, took part in a protest as part of the so-called Women's Strike.
The accusation identifying the aforementioned women as organizers of the assembly cannot be considered justified because the Act of July 24, 2015, the Law on Assemblies, which regulates, among other things, the rules for organizing assemblies and the requirements imposed on organizers, provides in Article 4 paragraph 1 that the right to organize assemblies does not belong to persons lacking full capacity to perform legal acts. Izabela XXX and Julia XXX therefore cannot be punished for organizing an assembly of which, for formal reasons, they could not be the organizers. However, accepting that they organized and presided over the assembly while bypassing the statutory procedure is impermissible in view of Articles 18 and 19 of the Law on Assemblies. Those provisions regulate the duties and conduct of organizers and persons presiding over an assembly, as well as certain formal requirements associated with those duties, including that the person presiding over an assembly possess an identification badge with a photograph and personal details issued by the municipal authority. Nor does the evidence show that the accused intended to organize an assembly.
Not every social activity resulting in the gathering of an unspecified number of people constitutes an assembly within the meaning of the aforementioned law.
In this case, in the context of holding the accused responsible for violating Article 52 § 2 points 2 and 3 of the Code of Petty Offenses, information concerning Izabela XXX's posts on Facebook is also legally irrelevant, as those materials demonstrate only attempts to spontaneously communicate with people who might have been interested in participating in the event. Such conduct is not legally prohibited and does not constitute grounds for recognizing the accused, under the applicable provisions, as organizers of an assembly. In the Court's view, the form of the event in which the two women participated did not constitute an assembly at all, but a protest. Therefore, under the provisions of the Law on Assemblies, the event held in Lwówek Śląski on December 1, 2020, was not an organized assembly and was legally permissible.
The testimony of the police officer witness Rafał XXX shows only that Julia XXX walked at the head of the procession, issued instructions and directions concerning movement and the route of the march, and also asked the witness to clarify and coordinate with her any situations that arose in connection with the protest. The protest on December 1, 2020, was a spontaneous event conducted in a peaceful atmosphere. Julia XXX's conduct shows only that, as a resident of the town, she took an active part in the protest and was concerned that it should proceed without creating any danger.
It should also be added that it is difficult to regard seventeen-year-olds Izabela XXX and Julia XXX as people who could have played any significant leadership role in this protest, since Marta Lempart—one of the leaders of the nationwide campaign widely known as the so-called Women's Strike—is regarded as the actual co-organizer of the protests in question, held in many Polish cities. Life experience and logical reasoning provide no basis for concluding that two underage and inexperienced people took control of an organized gathering or performed a special role during it. It can only be concluded that the accused performed auxiliary organizational functions intended to help the protest proceed, including preventing any problems, particularly disruptions to road traffic or public order.
Reference should be made to the appeal—a leaflet signed by Izabela XXX, dated October 30, 2020, which stated: “We appeal to all participants to exercise prudence, caution, and refrain from shouting excessively vulgar slogans (...) while walking along the street, we will occupy only one lane, allowing vehicles to pass. We will not allow intersections to be blocked.” This conduct clearly indicates that, despite her young age, she is a responsible person who respects the principles of public order.
Despite the wording of the accusation that the accused presided over the assembly after it had been dissolved, no evidence, including the testimony of the witness present at the protest, indicates that such a situation actually occurred.
Pursuant to Article 1 § 1 of the Code of Petty Offenses, liability for an offense applies only to a person who commits a socially harmful act prohibited by a law in force at the time it was committed.
The conduct of the accused was not socially harmful and did not fulfill the statutory elements of Article 52 § 2 of the Code of Petty Offenses; therefore, the proceedings had to be discontinued.