Dilemmas of Justice: Public Perception of Verdict Annulments Due to Judicial Appointment Irregularities in the Context of the Polish Case of 'Bloody Tulip'

• In Event: Crime, Science and Politics WG Panel 9: Law, Security, and the Politics of Crime

Abstract

In January 2025, the Court of Appeal overturned the life imprisonment sentence of Mariusz G., known as the "Bloody-Tulip," who had confessed to the three murders. This decision stemmed from concerns regarding the involvement of the judge (in the original trial), who was appointment by National Council of the Judiciary (neo-KRS) raised questions about judicial independence and impartiality.
The issue of judicial appointment by neo-KRS in Poland is linked to a broader rule of law crisis stemming from reforms implemented by the previous government. Both the CJEU and the ECHR have repeatedly questioned these appointments procedures, highlighting their inconsistency with European standards.
The "Bloody Tulip" case has opened extensive public debate regarding the social perception of justice. On one hand, there is a fundamental need to ensure that every defendant is guaranteed a fair trial. On the other hand, the public finds it challenging to accept the annulment in cases of such gravity, especially when evidence strongly indicates the defendant's guilt. This situation can lead to a sense of injustice and undermine trust in the judiciary.
Additionally, the question of judicial activism arises, where judges, aiming to underline systemic flaws within the justice system, make decisions to challenge verdicts on procedural grounds. While these actions intend to uphold the rule of law, they may result in scenarios where perpetrators of evade punishment or face prolonged trials, affecting victims and their families.
This presentation aims to analyse the impact of formal procedural irregularities on the public perception of justice, considering Poland's rule of law crisis. The analysis will be based on the "Bloody-Tulip" case, as well as other similar cases. It will discuss the consequences of such decisions for public trust in the judiciary and the dilemmas associated with balancing the fair trial guarantees with societal expectations for effective justice delivery.

Author

• Adrian Kaczmarek, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan