Permissibility of search, deprivation of property, restriction of contacts and detention of immigrants in the context of the powers of controlled individuals

Czasopismo Prawa Karnego i Nauk Penalnych Rok XXVI: 2022, numer 1-2
Journal of Criminal Law and Penal Studies Volume XXVI: 2022, No. 1-2

Katarzyna Trzosińska

Full text in PDF (open access)

Keywords

Summary

The refugee crisis on the Polish-Belarusian border related to the appearance on the
border of a significant number of people who were brought to the territory of Belarus
and then directed to the territory of Poland in an organized manner by Belarusian ser-
vices led to a number of actions by, among others, Polish authorities, the legal aspects
of which required urgent elaboration. This article addresses the issue of permissibility
of search, deprivation of property, restriction of contacts and detention of immigrants
in the context of the powers of controlled individuals. Searching is one of the well-es-
tablished regulations of criminal procedure, it is closely related to the implementation
of its objectives, and besides, it is usually associated precisely with criminal procedure .
A search constitutes an interference with constitutionally protected rights and freedoms
(personal inviolability and the right to privacy) and is subject to a number of require-
ments that must be met in order for the authorities appointed to carry out this activity
properly. Currently in the Polish legal order there are a number of regulations that in
essence correspond to the search and seizure of things within the meaning of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, but their norms do not meet the guarantee standards provided
for this institution.

Bibliography

Cora Ł., Konstytucyjna wolność przemieszczania się, a uprawnienia i obowiązku Policji oraz Straży Granicznej w zakresie kontroli osobistej i przeszukania bagażu, w: Prawne aspekty podróży i turystyki – historia i współczesność: prace poświęcone pamięci profesora Janusza Sondla, red. P. Cybula, Kraków 2018.
Koper R., Przeszukanie w wypadkach niecierpiących zwłoki, „Prokuratura i Prawo” 2014, z. 11–12.

Crossing the border and staying on the territory of immigrants under conditions of state of necessity

Czasopismo Prawa Karnego i Nauk Penalnych Rok XXVI: 2022, numer 1-2
Journal of Criminal Law and Penal Studies Volume XXVI: 2022, No. 1-2

Wiktor Antolak, Szymon Tarapata, Witold Zontek

Full text in PDF (open access)

Keywords

Summary

The refugee crisis on the Polish-Belarusian border related to the appearance on the bor-
der of a significant number of people who were brought to the territory of Belarus and
then directed to the territory of Poland in an organized manner by Belarusian services
led to a number of actions by, among others, Polish authorities, the legal aspects of which
required urgent elaboration. This article addresses the issue of crossing the border and
staying on the territory of immigrants under conditions of state of necessity. The con-
siderations carried out in this text have proven that it is possible to legalize a foreigner’s
crossing of the Polish border or stay in the Republic of Poland by invoking a state of
superior necessity. Sometimes, too, such acts will result in the exclusion of guilt (when
the migrant sacrifices a good of the same or greater value than the good being saved).
It is also impossible to exclude the possibility of attacking the property of officers guard-
ing the border area as a necessary defense. This is possible when service representatives
commit unlawful acts against migrants. It is also permissible to take defensive action
when, for example, officers, acting without any legal basis, take the migrants’ money or
destroy phones belonging to them. This is because then a representative of the services,
performing actions that are completely outside his competence, commits a direct and
unlawful attack on other people’s movable property. The determination that the officers’
actions are the result of the execution of orders instructing them to commit crimes
(in the absence of normatively effective authorization for the issuance of a specific or-
der, such as push-back) leads to the conclusion that these behaviors are unlawful and
a necessary defense is available against them.

Bibliography

Boczek K., Jakby to nie byli ludzie. 13 form bezwzględnej przemocy polskich służb granicznych, < https://oko.press/jakby-to-nie-byli-ludzie-13-form-bezwzglednej-przemocy-polskich-sluzb-granicznych-katalog-bezprawia/?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter&fbclid=IwAR0kzyxsqTOqySTBGsGt1dmq1LJSH_EH-896StOHOI9VGyxGIKiij5gjiwBo#Echobox=1639253175 >.
Ćwiąkalski Z., w: Kodeks karny. Część szczególna. Tom II. Komentarz do art. 277-277d,red. W. Wróbel, A. Zoll, Warszawa 2017.
Garlicki L., w: Konstytucja Rzeczpospolitej Polski. Komentarz. Tom II, red. L. Garlicki, M. Zubik, Warszawa 2016.
Kryzys humanitarny na pograniczu polsko-białoruskim. Raport Grupy Granica,red. W. Klaus, < https://www.grupagranica.pl/files/Raport-GG-Kryzys-humanitarny-napograniczu-polsko-bialoruskim.pdf >.
Spotowski A., Funkcja niebezpieczeństwa w prawie karnym, Warszawa 1990.
Tarapata S., Przypisanie sprawstwa skutku w sensie dynamicznym w polskim prawie karnym, Kraków 2019.
Wróbel W., Zoll A., Polskie prawo karne. Część ogólna, Kraków 2012.
Zając D., Stosowanie procedury push-back a odpowiedzialność karna, „Karne24.com”,
< https://karne24.com/stosowanie-procedury-push-back-a-odpowiedzialnosc-karna/ >.
Zoll A., w: Kodeks karny. Część ogólna. Tom I. Część I. Komentarz do art. 1–52, red.
W. Wróbel, A. Zoll, Warszawa 2016.
Zontek W., w: Kodeks karny. Część ogólna. Komentarz do art. 1–116, red. M. Królikowski,
R. Zawłocki, Warszawa 2021.

Denotation of violence, deceit and complicity on the example of Article 264 § 2 of the Criminal Code

Czasopismo Prawa Karnego i Nauk Penalnych Rok XXVI: 2022, numer 1-2
Journal of Criminal Law and Penal Studies Volume XXVI: 2022, No. 1-2

Daniel Brodowski

Full text in PDF (open access)

Keywords

Summary

The refugee crisis on the Polish-Belarusian border related to the appearance on the bor-
der of a significant number of people who were brought to the territory of Belarus and
then directed to the territory of Poland in an organized manner by Belarusian services
led to a number of actions by, among others, Polish authorities, the legal aspects of which
required urgent elaboration. This article addresses the issue of the obligation to obey
an order and failure to obey an order and their criminal law consequences. The Polish
legislator based the responsibility for carrying out an order with criminal content on
the principle of “thinking bayonets.” Thus, a service representative cannot be completely
unreflective of his superior’s orders. He is entitled to verify the legality of the orders
addressed to him and may refrain from carrying them out when they contradict the
law. However, the systemic hierarchical nature of subordination cannot fully displace
individual criminal or disciplinary responsibility. It should be recognized that in cases
that are most obvious from the factual side, the behavior of officers in the execution of
an order (taking sick, wounded, or women with children to the forest in the cold without
providing them with any adequate medical-survival assistance) must raise doubts in
every officer about the legality of the order. In such cases, there is no room for excuses
for error regarding the potential legal evaluation of such acts.

Bibliography

Banasik K., Penalizacja bezprawnego przekroczenia granicy państwowej, „Studia Prawnicze. Rozprawy i Materiały” 2017, nr 1 (20).
Bielski M., w: Kodeks karny. Część szczególna. Tom II. Część I. Komentarz do art. 117–211a, red. W. Wróbel, A. Zoll, Warszawa 2017.
Bojarski T., w: A. Michalska-Warias, J. Piórkowska-Flieger, M. Szwarczyk, T. Bojarski, Kodeks wykroczeń. Komentarz aktualizowany, LEX/el. 2021.
Bojarski T., w: Kodeks wykroczeń. Komentarz, red. M. Szwarczyk, Warszawa 2019.
Ćwiąkalski Z., w: Kodeks karny. Część szczególna. Tom II. Część II. Komentarz do art. 212–277d, red. W. Wróbel, A. Zoll, Warszawa 2017.
Jachimowicz M., Nowe zasady odpowiedzialności za nielegalne przekroczenie granicy RP, „Prokuratura i Prawo” 2006, nr 5.
Kalitowski M., w: Kodeks karny. Komentarz, red. M. Filar, Warszawa 2016.
Kardas P., Teoretyczne podstawy odpowiedzialności karnej za przestępne współdziałanie, Kraków 2001.
Krajnik S., w: Kodeks wykroczeń. Komentarz, red. J. Lachowski, Warszawa 2021.
Kulik M., Wąsek A., w: Kodeks karny. Komentarz, red. M. Filar, Warszawa 2016.
Lach A., w: Kodeks karny. Komentarz, red. V. Konarska-Wrzosek, Warszawa 2020.
Laskowska K., Perkowska M., Przestępstwo nielegalnego przekroczenia polskiej granicy, „Prawo w Działaniu. Sprawy Karne” 2020, nr 43.
Mozgawa M., w: Kodeks karny. Komentarz, red. M. Budyn-Kulik, P. Kozłowska-Kalisz, M. Kulik, M. Mozgawa, Warszawa 2015.
Nielegalne przekroczenie granicy państwowej, strona archiwalna Prokuratury Okręgowej w Zielonej Górze z 4 kwietnia 2005 r., <http://www.zielona-gora.po.gov.pl/index.php?id=36&ida=2862>.
Oczkowski T., w: Kodeks karny. Komentarz, red. V. Konarska-Wrzosek, Warszawa 2020.
Skazania prawomocne z oskarżenia publicznego – dorośli – wg rodzajów przestępstw i wymiaru kary w I.2008-2020, opracowanie wieloletnie Ministerstwa Sprawiedliwości, <https://isws.ms.gov.pl/pl/baza-statystyczna/opracowania-wieloletnie/ >.
Słownik języka polskiego, t. II, red. M. Szymczak, Warszawa 1982.
Trybus M., Nielegalne przekroczenie granicy – aspekty prawnokarne, „Studia Prawno-
ustrojowe” 2019, nr 46.
Zoll A., w: Kodeks karny. Część ogólna. Tom I. Cześć I. Komentarz do art. 1–52, red. W. Wróbel, Warszawa 2016.
Zoll A., w: Kodeks karny. Część szczególna. Tom II. Część I. Komentarz do art. 117–211a, red. W. Wróbel, Warszawa 2017.

Obligation to obey an order and failure to obey an order and their criminal law consequences

Czasopismo Prawa Karnego i Nauk Penalnych Rok XXVI: 2022, numer 1-2
Journal of Criminal Law and Penal Studies Volume XXVI: 2022, No. 1-2

Szymon Tarapata, Witold Zontek

Full text in PDF (open access)

Keywords

Summary

The refugee crisis on the Polish-Belarusian border related to the appearance on the bor-
der of a significant number of people who were brought to the territory of Belarus and
then directed to the territory of Poland in an organized manner by Belarusian services
led to a number of actions by, among others, Polish authorities, the legal aspects of which
required urgent elaboration. This article addresses the issue of the obligation to obey
an order and failure to obey an order and their criminal law consequences. The Polish
legislator based the responsibility for carrying out an order with criminal content on
the principle of “thinking bayonets.” Thus, a service representative cannot be completely
unreflective of his superior’s orders. He is entitled to verify the legality of the orders
addressed to him and may refrain from carrying them out when they contradict the
law. However, the systemic hierarchical nature of subordination cannot fully displace
individual criminal or disciplinary responsibility. It should be recognized that in cases
that are most obvious from the factual side, the behavior of officers in the execution of
an order (taking sick, wounded, or women with children to the forest in the cold without
providing them with any adequate medical-survival assistance) must raise doubts in
every officer about the legality of the order. In such cases, there is no room for excuses
for error regarding the potential legal evaluation of such acts.

Bibliography

Majewski J., w: Kodeks karny. Część szczególna. Tom III. Komentarz do art. 278–363 k.k., red. W. Wróbel, A. Zoll, Warszawa 2022.
Zakrzewski P., Stopniowanie winy w prawie karnym, Warszawa 2016.