A ground for revoking a legally effective fine K 23/13
Depriving a fined person of the right to revoke a legally effective fine issued on the basis of a normative act which was subsequently ruled by the Constitutional Tribunal to be inconsistent with the Constitution, a ratified international agreement or statute is inconsistent with the Constitution.
At the hearing on 15 July 2014 at 9.00 a.m., the Constitutional Tribunal considered an application, submitted by the Polish Ombudsman, with regard to a ground for revoking a legally effective fine.
The Constitutional Tribunal adjudicated that Article 101(1), first sentence, of the Act of 24 August 2001 of the Code of Procedure Concerning Misdemeanours, insofar as it deprived a fined person of the right to revoke a legally effective fine issued on the basis of a normative act, which was subsequently ruled by the Constitutional Tribunal to be inconsistent with the Constitution, a ratified international agreement or statute, was inconsistent with Article 190(4) of the Constitution.
The constitutional issue amounted to the question of an excessively narrow ‑ in the light of Article 190(4) of the Constitution – definition of a ground for revoking a legally effective fine. The judgment exclusively referred to a ground arising from Article 101(1), first sentence in fine, of the Code of Procedure Concerning Misdemeanours which deprived a fined person of the right to revoke a legally effective fine issued on the basis of a normative act which was subsequently ruled by the Constitutional Tribunal to be inconsistent with the Constitution, a ratified international agreement or statute.
The Tribunal stated that a legally effective fine fell under the category of “another determination” within the meaning of Article 190(4) of the Constitution. What weighed it favour of that was a number of findings set out in the judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal in the case SK 38/03, which referred to the essence, special character and constitutional qualification of a relevant procedure for issuing a fine.
The Constitutional Tribunal stated that neither the challenged provision nor any other provision of the Code of Procedure Concerning Misdemeanours provided grounds for revoking a legally effective fine for a reason that it had been issued on the basis of a norm subsequently ruled to be inconsistent with a higher-level norm for review. The legislator had not provided for a mechanism for revoking a legally effective fine based on the ground referred to in Article 190(4) of the Constitution.
Furthermore, the specific character of a procedure for issuing a fine and a rule determining that a fine became legally effective led to the situation where a fined person could not be granted the right to file an appeal or a complaint. By contrast, it had aptly been emphasised in the jurisprudence of courts that revoking a legally effective fine was not possible in the course of a procedure for issuing a fine.
The Constitutional Tribunal also noted that the constitutional issue had not been resolved by the Act of 27 September 2013 amending the Code of Criminal Procedure and certain other acts.
The hearing was presided over by Judge Małgorzata Pyziak – Szafnicka, and the Judge Rapporteur was Judge Stanisław Rymar.