CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 10 mars 2023

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .s1DE04B9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 27 March 2023   FIRST SECTION Application no. 3245/21 Jacek SZEREMETA against Poland lodged on 9 December 2020 communicated on 10 March 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant was a judge of the Kluczbork District Court. On 9 April 2019 the Disciplinary Court at the Wrocław Court of Appeal found the applicant guilty of compromising the dignity of the office of judge and ordered his dismissal from office. It relied on the applicant’s prior final conviction for sexually abusing his assistant (Article 199 § 1 of the Criminal Code). The applicant lodged an appeal. On 12 March 2020 the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court changed the description of the charge and upheld the remainder of the first instance’s judgment (case no. II DSS 10/19). It sat in a panel of three judges composed of judges Konrad Wytrykowski and Ryszard Witkowski and a lay judge Jolanta Jarząbek. The judgment was served on the applicant’s lawyer on 11 May 2020. All judges of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court who dealt with the applicant’s case were appointed by the President of Poland on 19   September 2018 upon the National Council of the Judiciary’s recommendation (resolution of 3   August 2018, no.   317/2018). The applicant complains that the Disciplinary Chamber was not an “independent and impartial tribunal established by law,” in breach of Article   6 §   1 of the Convention.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Was Article 6 §   1 of the Convention under its civil or criminal head applicable to the proceedings complained of?   2.     Was the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court which dealt with the applicant’s case an “independent and impartial tribunal established by law”, as required by Article   6 §   1 of the Convention? Reference is made to the Court’ s judgments in Reczkowicz v.   Poland , no.   43447/19, §§ 225-284, 22 July 2021 and Guðmundur Andri Ástráðsson v.   Iceland [GC], no.   26374/18, §§ 205-290, 1 December 2020.