RE: The Illegal Confiscation of My Property

I demand to be allowed to present a motion to a court or a prosecutor to present justification of the authorization decision with regard to the confiscation of my property. In fact, I demand that my property be returned forthwith.

In order for this process to have been initiated, Herr F must have made a statement in which the accusations being made against me were outlined. I am given to understand these allegations were the theft of certain documents, extortion and blackmail. I say “given to understand” as no confirmation of these allegations has ever been presented to me. Now, seven months after my arrest, I believe it is definitely not unreasonable to demand to be given a copy of the document, the original complaint, the presentation of which, by Herr F, caused this process to be initiated.

By virtue of Article 220 § 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure a search may be conducted by the prosecutor, or, with warrant issued by the prosecutor, by the police, and, also in cases specified in law, by another agency. The person on whose premises the search is to be conducted should be presented with a warrant issued by the prosecutor.

The code of Criminal Procedure states clearly that the police may conduct a search, as they did. However, the law states clearly that I should have been presented with a warrant. It is now seven months since my arrest and I have never seen this warrant. I demand to see this warrant and to be given a copy of it without any further delay or obfuscation.

Objects which may serve as evidence, or be subject to seizure in order to secure penalties regarding property, criminal measures involving property or claims to redress damage, may be surrendered when so required by the prosecutor (during the preparatory proceedings), and in cases not amenable to delay, by the police or an other authorized agency (Article 217 § 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure).

As I have never seen a warrant I can only state what I have been informed, which is that my computers were confiscated, as evidence, in order to ascertain that I was in possession of documents stolen from Herr F. I was also told by the police upon being arrested that these documents were being used by me in order to blackmail Herr F and extort money from him and that I would be charged with these criminal offences. This was the reason given to me by the police through an interpreter for my arrest and incarceration. Nothing was given to me in writing, and although I was given the reason for my arrest, nothing with regard to my rights was given to me by the police. This was not by accident, but by design as there was an interpreter present for the purpose.

The arrested person should be informed immediately about the reasons for his arrest and his rights.

With regard to the reasons for my arrest it has subsequently been established that there were no documents stolen and no attempt at either extortion or blackmail. Each aspect of the complaint has been shown to be figments of the imagination of someone who seems to have transmigrated from the pages of a Franz Kafka novelette into post-Communist Poland. This person is here referred to as Herr F.

It is clear that I was made to surrender my property by the police. It is also clear that the law states categorically that:

If the surrender is demanded by the police or another agency, the holder of the objects liable to surrender has the right to make, without delay, motion to a court or a prosecutor to present justification of the authorization decision and the person MUST be informed about his/her right.

I was not informed then, and I have never been informed, of my right to make an appeal to a court or prosecutor for justification of the authorization decision. The law is unambiguous, the person MUST be informed about his/her right. This right has been deliberately withheld from me and this very act is contrary to Polish law and is indeed an offence. I am not interested in anything other than being granted my legal right to this hearing. Having waited seven months to discover for myself what the law states that I MUST BE INFORMED ABOUT, I do believe it is not unreasonable to point out to all concerned that time is of the essence in this matter and that I demand an immediate response. Otherwise, I shall have no alternative but to issue instructions to my lawyer with regard to taking action to rectify the situation. I hope this will not become necessary.

I am aware that sometimes the police are empowered to act without the issuance of a warrant by the prosecutor. I suspect there may be an attempt to justify not having shown me a warrant by suggesting that this was such a case.

I would just like to point out that if this was the case then the law says the following:

The holder [of the property seized] shall be served, within 14 days of the seizure of the objects, an order of the prosecutor authorizing the action (Article 217 § 4 of the Code of Criminal Procedure).

I would like to remind all concerned that I have been incarcerated on the grounds that I might attempt to run away from Polish justice. I would also like to remind all concerned that this incarceration was deemed incorrect by a Polish court.

At the same time I was being incorrectly incarcerated in the name of Polish justice, I was being deliberately denied my legitimate rights by those empowered to administer Polish justice. I now humbly request that the law be obeyed and reserve the right to take any action deemed necessary to ensure that the law is obeyed.