Łukasz Dudzic, known for investigating offences committed by police officers and prosecutors, wrote to our editorial office.

On 29 March 2022 at 4:36 p.m., in Kruszyn, on Brzoskwiniowa Street (...) a vehicle with registration number (...) and its driver (a prosecutor – editor’s note) were parked nonchalantly, with contempt for traffic regulations, on the entire width of the pavement instead of properly, like the black vehicle nearby, in the car park. It seems to me that exemplary conduct can be expected from someone who brings charges against citizens for breaking the law.

We replied to Mr Dudzic that there was plenty of room to pass between the car and the parcel locker, and that the police would probably do nothing because it was permissible.

Łukasz Dudzic replied as follows:

Based on my many years of experience, it looks like this: if you park there and the Municipal Police or the police arrive, no explanation that there is a metre of pavement and plenty of grass to walk across nearby will work. You will be told that stopping or parking on the pavement is permitted provided that the width of the pavement left for pedestrians is sufficient not to impede their movement and is no less than 1.5 metres.

In our case, although the regulations are the same throughout the country, the police will approach the matter in two different ways, depending on who is driving.

  • Ordinary citizen – If I were the one leaving a vehicle there in that way, or someone they “love and like” as much as they do me, it would look like this. If I said that there was plenty of room between the parcel locker and the vehicle, they would consult a site map and conclude that I was occupying the entire width of the pavement. If the case went to court, an expert in road traffic would be appointed. I would hear that, yes, there is space, but it is no longer a pavement, only a car park on private property—in this case, belonging to the Lewiatan shop. The argument that there is plenty of space would not work.
  • Official – If a vehicle like this is parked there and the driver is a prosecutor or a police officer, then the argument that there is plenty of room between the parcel locker and the vehicle does apply!

We asked the police about the incident. It turned out that Łukasz Dudzic had predicted correctly—the prosecutor was not punished.

Pursuant to Article 54 § 2 of the Code of Procedure in Petty Offence Cases, I hereby notify you that the explanatory proceedings conducted did not provide grounds for submitting a motion to punish to the Criminal Division of the District Court in Bolesławiec in connection with the notification of an offence concerning the stopping of a vehicle of the (...) make on 29 March 2022 at 4:36 p.m. in Kruszyn, on Brzoskwiniowa Street, across the entire width of the pavement, i.e. an act under Article 97 of the Petty Offences Code in conjunction with Article 47(1) of the Road Traffic Act, in which you reported the commission of an offence because the act does not contain the elements of an offence.

During the explanatory proceedings, the Bolesławiec Municipality was asked about the status of the relevant sections of the road, namely the paved part of the plot (right next to the parcel locker) and the pavement. The reply stated that the paved part of the plot (next to the parcel locker) is owned by a private individual, on whose property a commercial building has been situated. The next part of the plot (the pavement), meanwhile, is owned by Bolesławiec Municipality and has the status of an internal road (it is not a public road within the meaning of the Public Roads Act).

asp. szt. Paweł Klimek

Łukasz Dudzic commented on the police’s findings as follows:

A few things here do not add up for me.

  1. A municipal road (abbreviated as MR) is one of the four categories of public roads in Poland and is owned by the relevant municipal authority.
  2. There is no sign anywhere indicating an “internal road”, so I wonder whether the Municipal Police asked the Municipality to install the proper signage, since there is none there.
  3. If the pavements in the Municipality are internal roads, then the road itself must also be an internal road, because there is no sign saying internal road—pavement, internal road—road. And if that is so, then traffic regulations do not apply on municipal roads—I suppose that would mean all the roads in Kruszyn except DK94.
  4. I have never encountered a situation where, for example, on private or municipal land, one part—the pavement—was an internal road while the carriageway was a public road. It is either one or the other.

I spoke to someone from the road traffic engineering department of the Provincial Police Headquarters in (...), and he laughed at the idea that the road, meaning the carriageway for cars, could be a public road while the pavement was an internal road. If the road is public, then the pavement is public too, and vice versa.