Supreme Court Overturns Order Suspending Judge Piebiak

Poland's Supreme Court has overturned a decision by the Minister of Justice to immediately suspend judge Łukasz Piebiak from his duties. The court ruled that the minister's order lacked sufficient legal basis and did not meet the criteria for immediate action.

“

The Supreme Court found that the order issued by the Minister of Justice had no justified basis.

Presiding judge Marek Siwek stated that the Supreme Court found no justification for the "immediacy" of the suspension, as the alleged offenses cited by the minister occurred many years prior. The court emphasized that immediate suspension is typically reserved for actions requiring an instant reaction that cannot be addressed through other procedures. The minister's justifications, involving two separate investigations against Piebiak, were deemed insufficient to warrant such an urgent measure.

“

if the interests of the service require the immediate removal of a judge from performing official duties, then it is clear that the concept of 'immediacy' should be linked to the fact that an act has been committed which requires an immediate reaction, which cannot be taken in any other way.

Minister of Justice initiated the suspension on June 15, citing two ongoing prosecutorial investigations. One concerns the so-called "hater's" scandal within the Ministry of Justice in 2019, and the other involves allegations of using a false testament, for which a request to lift Piebiak's immunity was filed in December 2025. The minister argued that the evidence gathered cast serious doubt on Piebiak's ethical and legal standing.

“

None of the circumstances, about which the Minister of Justice writes in the justification of his decision, belong to this category.

Łukasz Piebiak, who served as deputy minister under Zbigniew Ziobro, was elected to the National Council of the Judiciary (KRS) in May by the Sejm. His previous roles include serving as the deputy head of the Ministry of Justice. The Supreme Court's decision effectively reinstates him pending further proceedings or a different procedural approach by the justice minister.

“

The material evidence gathered in them (proceedings) casts serious doubts on the judge's ethical and legal standing.