"In principle, the Venice Commission supports the direction of the changes and the main systemic solutions that have been proposed. The Commission raised some concerns about the status of the National Council of Prosecutors, who could nominate candidates, and also about the lack of the possibility to dismiss the new Prosecutor General," emphasized Minister of Justice Adam Bodnar. "This opinion is positive, with some doubts and suggestions for modifications, which we will of course take into account during the legislative process and, to the extent possible, improve the law." Minister Bodnar noted.

The draft amendment to the Prosecutor's Office Law, presented by Minister Bodnar, aims to restore the independence of the prosecutor's office from the executive branch by separating the functions of the Minister of Justice and the Prosecutor General, and establishing the Prosecutor General as a separate body, elected by the Sejm with the approval of the Senate. To achieve this principle, the amendment introduces three basic systemic solutions.

Separation of the functions of the Minister of Justice and the Prosecutor General:

• Currently, these functions are combined, which poses a threat to the independence of the prosecutor's office.
• After the amendment is implemented, the Prosecutor General will be an independent body, appointed by the Sejm for a six-year term, without the possibility of reappointment.

Abolition of the National Prosecutor and the National Prosecutor's Office:

• In place of these structures, the General Prosecutor's Office will be established as an organizational unit of the Prosecutor General, ensuring greater independence from the government administration.

Rules for the selection of the Prosecutor General:

• Various organizations and groups of MPs will be able to nominate candidates, with the final decision belonging to the Sejm and Senate.

The current draft aims to rebuild the independence of the prosecutor's office and strengthen the rule of law. These changes respond to earlier concerns from the Venice Commission in December 2017, which pointed to threats to the impartiality of the prosecutor's office due to the combination of the functions of Prosecutor General and Minister of Justice.

"The second opinion concerned the status of judges, and essentially it was a response to four abstract questions about how to approach judges who were appointed as a result of flawed nominations after 2018, that is, so-called neo-judges. The Venice Commission focused on highlighting various international standards and, in a sense, sought in its opinion to find a middle ground between how to handle this in a comprehensive and thorough manner for this entire group of almost three thousand judges, and on the other hand, how to take into account the element of individual assessment," said the Minister of Justice.

According to the preliminary draft regulations, which are still being worked on, judges appointed by the President of the Republic of Poland at the request of the National Council of the Judiciary, improperly formed by the law of December 8, 2017, are divided into three groups.

The first group – judges who graduated from the National School of Judiciary and Public Prosecution:

• Approximately 1,600 people. Considered appointed in accordance with the Constitution, their status will not be questioned.

The second group – individuals who participated in building the undemocratic legal order (the so-called common design):

• Approximately 500 people. They will be held accountable before a new disciplinary body – the Disciplinary Council.

The third group – judges who advanced in the judiciary structure without actively participating in common design activities:

• Approximately 900 people. They accepted promotions but did not directly engage in political activities. They will be able to avoid disciplinary responsibility if they voluntarily return to their previous positions.

Minister Adam Bodnar informed that the dialogue with the Venice Commission would continue, and the opinions issued by the Commission would be helpful in further debate and preparing appropriate laws.