Acta Iuris Stetinensis

Wcześniej: Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Szczecińskiego. Acta Iuris Stetinensis

ISSN: 2083-4373     eISSN: 2545-3181    OAI    DOI: 10.18276/ais.2020.30-02

Lista wydań / 2/2020 (30)
Refusal to adjourn a hearing due to the defender’s being ill vs. execution of the right of defence - comments on Article 378a § 1 of the Polish Code of Criminal Procedure

Autorzy: Michał Ignasiak
Słowa kluczowe: principle of the right of defence procedural safeguards adjournment of the term of a hearing
Rok wydania:2020
Liczba stron:13 (21-33)
Cited-by (Crossref) ?:
Liczba pobrań ?: 175


The object of this paper constitutes the issue regarding the principle of the right of defence in Polish criminal proceedings in the context of the new regulation included in Article 378a par. 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which came into effect on 5 October 2019 (as a result of the entry into force of the Act of 19 July 2019 amending the Act on the Code of Criminal Procedure and certain other acts, Dz.U. (Journal of Laws) of 2019 item 1694). To be precise, the court’s refusal to take into consideration the defender’s motion for adjournment of the term of a hearing due to his or her illness confirmed with a sick leave issued by a pathologist. The aim of this study was to draw attention to the questionable character of the afore- mentioned Article in terms of the procedural safeguards of the accused. The paper presents the circumstances, as well as the state of proceedings, indicating the evidence of violation of the principle of the right of defence in criminal proceedings by improper application of Arti¬cle 378a par. 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. A formal-dogmatic method has been used. Furthermore, the author’s intention was to present the irrationality of the Polish legisla¬tor introducing solutions contrary to the model of criminal procedure, including, in particu- lar, violation of the constitutionally guaranteed rights of the accused.
Pobierz plik

Plik artykułu


1.Daszkiewicz, W., Proces karny. Część ogólna, Poznań 1995.
2.Grzegorczyk, T. and Tylman, J., Polskie postępowanie karne, Warszawa 2014.
3.Kosonoga, J., in: Stefański, R. and Zabłocki, S. (eds.), Kodeks postępowania karnego. Tom I. Komentarz do art. 1-166, LEX.
4.Misztal, P., in: Świecki, D. (ed.), Meritum. Postępowania karne, Warszawa 2019.
5.Murzynowski, A., Istota i zasady procesu karnego, Warszawa 1994.
6.Prusak, F., Kodeks postępowania karnego. Komentarz, LEX.
7.Siewierski, M. et al., Postępowanie karne w zarysie, Warszawa 1971.
8.Steinborn, S., in: Steinborn, S. (ed.), Kodeks postępowania karnego. Komentarz do wybra¬nych przepisów, LEX 2016.
9.Wiliński, P., Pojęcie rzetelnego procesu karnego, in: Wiliński, P. (ed.), Rzetelny proces kar¬ny, LEX.
10.Zagrodnik, J. et al., in: Zagrodnik, J. (ed.), Kodeks postępowania karnego. Komentarz praktyczny do nowelizacji 2019, LEX.