4 ms·

>This case is investigated by Central Anti-Corruption Bureau in Poland but I doubt it'll do much harm to Newag. The Office of Rail Transport of Poland that woul

>This case is investigated by Central Anti-Corruption Bureau in Poland but I doubt it'll do much harm to Newag. The Office of Rail Transport of Poland that would spam rail company with complaints and orders for a small mistake in train schedule washed it's hands from intervening in this case and train purchases have highly regulated tender process and very little wiggle room for rail companies. It's clearly a crime of sabotage under Art. 254a kk. Tender process does not matter in this case. We just need a competent prosecutor. https://sip.lex.pl/akty-prawne/dzu-dziennik-ustaw/kodeks-karny-16798683/art-254-a https://sip.lex.pl/akty-prawne/dzu-dziennik-ustaw/kodeks-kar...

TomaszZielinski 3y ago
Having read only that kk article, I'm not certain if trains are considered parts of the infrastructure?
- KptMarchewa 3y ago
  It works for train vandalism - why wouldn't it work on industrial scale? For example, someone stole active train parts: https://orzeczenia.gdansk-poludnie.sr.gov.pl/content/$N/151015050005006_X_K_000731_2016_Uz_2017-10-09_001 https://orzeczenia.gdansk-poludnie.sr.gov.pl/content/$N/1510...
  - TomaszZielinski 3y ago
    I don't know, that's why I asked--for me "infrastructure" sounds like the immovable parts. Similarly to road infrastructure, which doesn't include cars. But it's just my armchair impression, I have no idea how the law works in this context. I quickly scanned the sentence you linked to, and art. 254a seems to be applied only to the theft of wires from tracks? Or am I missing something? I've tried googling "infrastruktura kolejowa", and it seems that Ustawa o transporcie kolejowym defines it in art. 4.1, referencing Appendix 1. And that Appendix only lists immovable stuff. But again, I'm not a lawyer and I'm aware that definitions from one act often don't apply to a different act, in different branch of law.
    - myself248 3y ago
      In the usage I'm familiar with (in the US), the entire rail network is considered "transportation infrastructure", from a national perspective. But from the perspective of just the rail network, the track and other infrastructure is considered separate from the rolling stock. I wonder: If the rolling stock becomes immobilized, does it now count as immovable stuff?
      - comex 3y ago
        Reminds me of the recent Supreme Court case about whether a train is "in use" while parked at a railyard: https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/03/justices-search-for-the-line-on-use-of-a-locomotive/ https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/03/justices-search-for-the-l...
        TomaszZielinski 3y ago
        Thanks for the link! It's fascinating for a laymen like me how they considered all those different angles. And also: > For Breyer, however, the prospect of a “tractive power” test > confirmed that the concept of “use” is so inherently context-dependent > that the court would be better off taking the “common law approach” > of resolving just this particular case, > rather than attempting to determine the word’s meaning for all time.
      - TomaszZielinski 3y ago
        Ah, that's a very good distinction between the national perspective and the rail perspective! > I wonder: If the rolling stock becomes immobilized, does it now count as immovable stuff? Assuming it's a philosophical question, and not a legal one, how about: - A runner that's currently running is obviously a runner - A runner that finished running for today is still a runner - A runner with serious knee problems is a former runner ?
        jacquesm 3y ago
        We routinely call servers and such 'infrastructure' when they are in fact much easier to move (if not by themselves) than your average rail road car or locomotive. A kid could do it, all by themselves.
bitcharmer 3y ago
Being a 40+ year old Pole I am yet to see a single case of corruption in public sector be prosecuted.
- ajuc 3y ago
  Maciej Zalewski (a co-creator of Kaczyński's first party - Porozumienie Centrum) remains the only high-level politician I know of in Poland that was sentenced for corruption and actually went to jail. https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maciej_Zalewski_(filolog) https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maciej_Zalewski_(filolog) He warned Bagsik and co. (who stole millions of public money through the famous Art-B company and escaped to Israel) that the police wants to imprison them - so they managed to escape. Bagsik later confirmed that they shared some of that money with Porozumienie Centrum's business named Telegraf. Somehow only the less important guy (Zalewski) went to jail, but Kaczyński brothers weren't prosecuted. But there's a lot of low level corruption that is exposed, it's just usually ignored by country-wide media, because that corruption is local. For one example: https://samorzad.pap.pl/kategoria/prawo/prawomocny-wyrok-byly-niezatapialny-urzednik-jan-t-prawomocnie-skazany https://samorzad.pap.pl/kategoria/prawo/prawomocny-wyrok-byl...
  - matkoniecz 3y ago
    > but Kaczyński brothers weren't prosecuted. Is there any indicator they should have been in this case?
    - ajuc 3y ago
      Their company "Telegraf" got cheap credit from Bagsik just before.
- KptMarchewa 3y ago
  I haven't seen any evidence of corruption here - just pure malice and monopolistic behavior.
  - 6510 3y ago

TomaszZielinski 3y ago

Having read only that kk article, I'm not certain if trains are considered parts of the infrastructure?

KptMarchewa 3y ago
It works for train vandalism - why wouldn't it work on industrial scale? For example, someone stole active train parts: https://orzeczenia.gdansk-poludnie.sr.gov.pl/content/$N/151015050005006_X_K_000731_2016_Uz_2017-10-09_001 https://orzeczenia.gdansk-poludnie.sr.gov.pl/content/$N/1510...
- TomaszZielinski 3y ago
  I don't know, that's why I asked--for me "infrastructure" sounds like the immovable parts. Similarly to road infrastructure, which doesn't include cars. But it's just my armchair impression, I have no idea how the law works in this context. I quickly scanned the sentence you linked to, and art. 254a seems to be applied only to the theft of wires from tracks? Or am I missing something? I've tried googling "infrastruktura kolejowa", and it seems that Ustawa o transporcie kolejowym defines it in art. 4.1, referencing Appendix 1. And that Appendix only lists immovable stuff. But again, I'm not a lawyer and I'm aware that definitions from one act often don't apply to a different act, in different branch of law.
  - myself248 3y ago
    In the usage I'm familiar with (in the US), the entire rail network is considered "transportation infrastructure", from a national perspective. But from the perspective of just the rail network, the track and other infrastructure is considered separate from the rolling stock. I wonder: If the rolling stock becomes immobilized, does it now count as immovable stuff?
    - comex 3y ago
      Reminds me of the recent Supreme Court case about whether a train is "in use" while parked at a railyard: https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/03/justices-search-for-the-line-on-use-of-a-locomotive/ https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/03/justices-search-for-the-l...
      - TomaszZielinski 3y ago
        Thanks for the link! It's fascinating for a laymen like me how they considered all those different angles. And also: > For Breyer, however, the prospect of a “tractive power” test > confirmed that the concept of “use” is so inherently context-dependent > that the court would be better off taking the “common law approach” > of resolving just this particular case, > rather than attempting to determine the word’s meaning for all time.
    - TomaszZielinski 3y ago
      Ah, that's a very good distinction between the national perspective and the rail perspective! > I wonder: If the rolling stock becomes immobilized, does it now count as immovable stuff? Assuming it's a philosophical question, and not a legal one, how about: - A runner that's currently running is obviously a runner - A runner that finished running for today is still a runner - A runner with serious knee problems is a former runner ?
      - jacquesm 3y ago
        We routinely call servers and such 'infrastructure' when they are in fact much easier to move (if not by themselves) than your average rail road car or locomotive. A kid could do it, all by themselves.

bitcharmer 3y ago

Being a 40+ year old Pole I am yet to see a single case of corruption in public sector be prosecuted.

ajuc 3y ago
Maciej Zalewski (a co-creator of Kaczyński's first party - Porozumienie Centrum) remains the only high-level politician I know of in Poland that was sentenced for corruption and actually went to jail. https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maciej_Zalewski_(filolog) https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maciej_Zalewski_(filolog) He warned Bagsik and co. (who stole millions of public money through the famous Art-B company and escaped to Israel) that the police wants to imprison them - so they managed to escape. Bagsik later confirmed that they shared some of that money with Porozumienie Centrum's business named Telegraf. Somehow only the less important guy (Zalewski) went to jail, but Kaczyński brothers weren't prosecuted. But there's a lot of low level corruption that is exposed, it's just usually ignored by country-wide media, because that corruption is local. For one example: https://samorzad.pap.pl/kategoria/prawo/prawomocny-wyrok-byly-niezatapialny-urzednik-jan-t-prawomocnie-skazany https://samorzad.pap.pl/kategoria/prawo/prawomocny-wyrok-byl...
- matkoniecz 3y ago
  > but Kaczyński brothers weren't prosecuted. Is there any indicator they should have been in this case?
  - ajuc 3y ago
    Their company "Telegraf" got cheap credit from Bagsik just before.
KptMarchewa 3y ago
I haven't seen any evidence of corruption here - just pure malice and monopolistic behavior.
- 6510 3y ago