Public Prosecutor General (Poland)

Under this legislative framework, the prosecution service was headed by a General Prosecutor[3] and had jurisdiction over state bodies and private citizens.

[6] Under the 1950 Act, the procuracy was removed from the judicial branch of government and became a separate, nominally independent organisation under the auspices of the Council of State, an executive body.

Significant amendments made after Poland's transition to democracy removed the prosecution service from the control of the abolished Council of State and combined the role of Public Prosecutor General with the Minister of Justice.

The reforms coincided with the election of a more liberal government and sought to protect the prosecution service from political interference and guarantee its independence.

[14] These entrenching provisions sought to create security of tenure and to remove the potential for party-political interference in the duties of the Prosecutor General.

[18] The Commissioner for Human Rights of Poland unsuccessfully challenged a number of the amended provisions before the Polish Constitutional Tribunal.

[35] The 2016 amendments to the Act on the Public Prosecutor's Office have drawn domestic and international criticism from academics, intergovernmental organisations and civic groups.

These concerns have largely been related to a perceived reduction in prosecutorial independence, and questioning of the appropriateness of the dual-role of Justice Minister and Public Prosecutor, given the potential for conflicts to arise.

Rule of Law advocates have criticised the close involvement of the Public Prosecutor General in day-to-day prosecutorial affairs.

Rule of Law in Poland, a civic advocacy body, has argued that concentration of prosecutorial power in the Minister of Justice has allowed for party-political outcomes to dictate the appointment of prosecutors and corrupted the procedure for deciding whether or not to prosecute certain cases.

Given the combination of the Prosecutor General's role with that of Justice Minister, it has been argued that disciplinary proceedings have become a political rather than administrative tool which is used to ensure loyalty from the prosecutorial service.

A 2009 report by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe recognised an increasing European tendency towards independent, rather than subordinate prosecutorial offices.