Minister Żurek Removes Prosecutor Bogucka from National Prosecution Office

Justice Minister Waldemar Żurek has signed a decision revoking the secondment of prosecutor Julita Dziedzic-Bogucka to the National Prosecution Office, prompting a sharp response from her husband, presidential aide Zbigniew Bogucki.

Personnel Changes at the National Prosecution Office

Julita Dziedzic-Bogucka, who handled high-profile organized crime and corruption cases at the National Prosecution Office’s branch in Szczecin, has been removed from her position. Minister of Justice and Prosecutor General Waldemar Żurek signed the decision to end her secondment, transferring her back to the Regional Prosecutor’s Office.

Prosecutor General spokesperson Anna Adamiak confirmed the decision, stating that the minister utilized powers granted by current regulations. She noted that such personnel changes do not require justification and are subject to a three-month notice period.

Reaction from the Presidential Chancellery

The decision has drawn attention due to the status of the prosecutor’s husband, Zbigniew Bogucki, who leads the Presidential Chancellery under Karol Nawrocki and is a former politician for the Law and Justice party. When asked for comment, Bogucki described Minister Żurek as a “peculiar figure” but did not address the specific reasons for his wife’s removal.

Previous Involvement in High-Profile Investigations

Dziedzic-Bogucka was previously associated with the long-running investigation into the “melioration affair,” which involved irregularities in tenders managed by regional water authorities. Senator Stanisław Gawłowski, a central figure in that case, had previously accused the Bogucki family of political motivation, claims which Zbigniew Bogucki has consistently denied.

Context of Prosecution Reforms

This decision is part of ongoing staff restructuring overseen by the Ministry of Justice and the National Prosecution Office since the change in government. While the Ministry maintains these changes are necessary to restore independence and verify past personnel decisions, critics argue they reflect a broader political struggle over the judiciary.