CHAPTER 26. SURVEILLANCE AND TELEPHONE TAPPING.
Art. 237. Admissibility.
§ 1. After the commencement of the proceedings, the court, on the request of the public prosecutor, may order the surveillance and recording of the content of telephone conversations by way of telephone tapping, in order to gather evidence for proceedings in progress or to prevent a perpetration of a new offence.
§ 2. In urgent cases, the surveillance and telephone tapping may be ordered by the public prosecutor who is obliged to request the approval of the court within three days. The court issues the decision within five days in a hearing without the participation of the parties. In the event of a refusal to approve the public prosecutor’s order, the court orders that all recordings be destroyed. An appeal against the decision stays its execution.
§ 3. The surveillance and telephone tapping is allowed only when the proceedings in progress or a justified concern that a new offence might be perpetrated pertain to:
1) homicide,
2) general endangerment to life and health or causing a disaster,
3) trafficking in people,
4) kidnapping,
5) demanding ransom,
6) hi-jacking of an aircraft or a sea vessel,
7) armed robbery, aggravated theft and extortion,
8) attacking the independence and territorial integrity of the State,
9) attacking the constitutional order of the State or its supreme agencies, or a unit of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Poland,
10) espionage or disclosing a secret information classified as “confidential” or “strictly confidential”,
11) amassing weapons, explosives or radioactive materials,
12) forging and circulating counterfeit money, payment bills or instruments, or transferable documents enabling the acquisition of money, goods, a load or a benefit in-kind or imposing an obligation to pay out capital, interest, share in profit or confirming participation in a company,
12a) counterfeiting or falsifying invoices or using counterfeit invoices or invoices indicating false data, which may have impact on the determination of public dues, its reimbursement or reimbursement of other dues of fiscal nature, as well as issuing and using invoices indicating false data, which may have impact on the determination of public dues, its reimbursement or reimbursement of other dues of fiscal nature,
13) manufacturing, processing, trafficking and smuggling drugs, their precursors, substitutes or psychotropic substances,
14) organised criminal,
15) property of significant value,
16) the use of violence or unlawful threats in connection with criminal proceedings,
16a) giving a false testimony or providing a false opinion or translation by an expert or translator,
16b) falsely accusing another person of an offence, fiscal offence or a fiscal misdemeanour,
16c) creating false evidence or undertaking other deceitful acts directing against another person a prosecution for an offence, fiscal offence or a fiscal misdemeanour,
16d) concealing evidence proving innocence of a person prosecuted for an offence, fiscal offence or a fiscal misdemeanour,
16e) informing a prosecuting authority about an offence, which has not been committed,
16f) aiding and abetting,
16g) not reporting an offence,
17) bribery and racketeering,
18) pimping, procuring and forcing into prostitution,
19) offences defined in Chapter XVI of the Criminal Code of 6 June 1997 (Journal of Laws of 2016, item 1137, as amended) and in Articles 5-8 of the Rome Statute of International Criminal Court, enacted in Rome on 17 July 1998 (Journal of Laws of 2003, item 708), hereinafter referred to as “the Statute”.
§ 3a. Surveillance and the telephone tapping is also permissible in order to disclose assets subject to forfeiture referred to in Article 45 § 2 of the Criminal Code and Article 33 § 2 of Fiscal Criminal Code.
§ 4. Surveillance and the telephone tapping is permissible with regard to a person suspected of an offence, an accused person, an aggrieved party or any other person whom the accused may contact or who may be connected with the offender or with the potential offence.
§ 5. Offices and institutions conducting telecommunications activity, as well as telecommunications enterprises within the meaning of the Act of 16 July 2004 Telecommunications Law, are obliged to facilitate the execution of a court or public prosecutor’s order concerning surveillance and telephone tapping and ensure the registration of the fact that such surveillance took place.
§ 6. Recordings may be played by the court or by the public prosecutor and, in urgent cases, by the Police, with the consent of the court or the public prosecutor.
§ 7. The register of telephone conversation surveillances may be examined by the court, and in preparatory proceedings, by the public prosecutor.
§ 8. (repealed)
Art. 237a. Public prosecutor’s rights concerning the use of evidence.
If, as a result of a control evidence was obtained that a person, against whom the control was ordered, had committed an offence prosecuted ex officio or a fiscal offence other than the offence, against which the control was directed, or that such an offence or fiscal offence was committed by another person, the public prosecutor decides whether this evidence will be used in criminal proceedings.
Art. 237b. (repealed).
Art. 238. Duration.
§ 1. Surveillance and telephone tapping may be imposed for a maximum period of three months, which may be extended in particularly justified cases for an additional period not exceeding three months.
§ 2. Surveillance should end immediately after the circumstances mentioned in Article 237 § 1-3 cease to exist, yet not later than with the expiry of the period, for which it was imposed.
§ 3. The public prosecutor, after the surveillance has ended, submits a motion that all recordings be destroyed, if they are immaterial to the criminal proceedings in their entirety. The court rules on the motion immediately, in a hearing without the participation of the parties.
§ 4. After the conclusion of preparatory proceedings, the public prosecutor submits the motion to destroy that part of the recordings that is immaterial to the criminal proceedings for which the surveillance and telephone tapping was ordered and which does not constitute evidence referred to in Article 237a. The court rules on the motion in a hearing, which the parties may attend.
§ 5. A motion for an order to destroy recordings may also be submitted by the person referred to in Article 237 § 4, not sooner than after the conclusion of preparatory proceedings. The court rules on the motion in a hearing, which the parties and the petitioner may attend.
Art. 239. Postponement of notification of order.
§ 1. Notification of the order allowing surveillance and telephone tapping with respect to the person concerned may be postponed for a period necessary to protect the interests of the case.
§ 2. In preparatory proceedings, notification of the order referred to in § 1 may not be postponed further than until the conclusion of the proceedings.
Art. 240. Interlocutory appeal.
An order allowing surveillance or telephone tapping is subject to interlocutory appeal. In the appeal, the person concerned with the order may request that both the grounds and the legality of the surveillance and telephone tapping be examined. An appeal against the order of the public prosecutor is considered by the court.
Art. 241. Other technical means.
The provisions of this Chapter apply accordingly to the surveillance and recording by technical means of the content of other conversations or messages, including e-mail correspondence.
Art. 242. Regulation.
The Minister of Justice, upon consultation with the Minister responsible for informatisation, the Minister of National Defence and the Minister of Internal Affairs shall define by way of a regulation the technical preparation of networks used for the transmission of information, for surveillance of telephone conversations or for other transmissions of information using these networks, as well as a manner of producing, registering, storing, recreating and destroying recordings of telephone conversations under surveillance or contents of other conversations or transmissions of information, including e-mail correspondence, bearing in mind the necessity of the adequate protection of the recording against loss, distortion or unauthorised disclosure.
Please note that this is an unofficial translation of the Act.