“Post-Office Money of PiS”
Piotr Sułek was the editor-in-chief of the weekly “Polish Post Office”, published by the company Post Media Service (presently Post-Tel sp. z.o.o.), whose owner is Polish Post Office. By performing work in Post Media Service he acquired doubts as to the settlement of financial accounts between Polish Post Office, under whose commission the weekly “Polish Post Office” is published and Post Media Service. In the letter of 3 April 2008, bound to the vice-minister of infrastructure Piotr Sułek indicated examples of wastefulness in his employer’s area of business, hurting in his opinion the company itself but also its owner- Polish Post Office. Piotr Sułek informed, amongst other things, about the income, costs and the possibility of savings.  He also indicated that 1.9 mln is allocated in Post Media Service and supports the financing of “individual endeavors as well as worker pensions of company employers unrelated to the publisher.” Answer from the minister with thanks for interest of the case of the post-office he received at the beginning of July 2008.

Piotr Sułek drew media into the case as well. The case of incorrectness in Post Media Service was described by Konrad Niklewicz as well as Pior Mączyński in the article “Post–Office Money of PiS” (PIS – one of the Polish parlamentary parties), which appeared in the day of 10 June 2008 in the daily newspaper “Gazeta Wyborcza”.

Lawsuit for returning to work
3 July 2008 Piotr Sułek acquired a notice of leave from work without the hold-up of notice leave times, despite the fact that he was on a medical treatent’s leave at the time. The official reason for the notice was the lack of trust for Piotr Sułek caused by the shadowing of Post Media Service, exposing information that were business secrets, extending false information as well as using a doctor’s leave for bypassing firing. 10 July 2008 Piotr Sułek acted against Post Media Service with a suit, in which he included a re-hiring for the current position, or if need be a settling of reimbursement for an unjustifiable dissolution from work. The case started in December 2008, in the character of a social organization Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights was involved, emphasizing the problem of legal protection of people whose social interest decided on exposing information on incorrectness in the companies of their employers.

Unjustifiable dismissal 
8 December 2009 the court of first instance admitted the lawsuit of Piotr Sułek. The Court, however, did not restored him to work but adjudicated reimbursement in the sum of one remuneration as well as the costs of the trail. In the oral explanation of the judgment the court stated that the sued company did not indicate a justifiable notice of leave in disciplinary terms. It drew attention that the behavior of the plaintiff may be perceived to be in the public interest. Specifically, the Court stated, that the reason of turning with a letter to the vice-minister of infrastructure did not hold the intention to harm the company, merely wanted to clear up the case of wastefulness. Furthermore, the defendant neither indicated, according to the court, that Piotr Sułek popularized false information about company, broke the trade secret nor over-used a medical treatment’s leave. According to the court the reinstated to work would be without a goal for the present conflict of the parties. Regional Court for Warsaw favored the argumentation of the court of first instance and dismissed both appeals: of the plaintiff and the defendant.

Whistle-blowers in the system of Polish law
The case of dismissal of Piotr Sułek stands as a good example of problems that affect the citizens who in the name of common interest decide to unmask unlawful activities. Those people are often punished not rewarded. For the situation of whistleblowers to have the possibility of deserved growth and to bring the society its desired effects, it is crucial to introduce in the system of Polish law helpful instruments that would guarantee one’s safety from the defense mechanism of the employer, for example dismissal from work, limiting remuneration, or the degradation of the employer.

For this reason, it would be worthy to introduce to the system of Polish law an appropriate bill which could be based on the solutions in the United States of America (Whistleblowers Protection Act of 1989) as well as the United Kingdom (Public Interest Disclosure Act of 1999).

* Artur Pietryka – lawyer in Strategic Litigation Program, Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights