Defense attorney for Volodymyr Z.: a Ukrainian was detained in Poland for acting in the interests of his country

Attorney Paprocki from the Paprocki, Wojciechowski & Partnerzy law firm, in the case of Volodymyr Z.’s arrest, also asked, „Will a Ukrainian citizen be extradited to Germany for destroying Russian critical infrastructure belonging to Gazprom?” and pointed to a number of ambiguities and the political dimension of the case.

Instrumental use of EAW

The European Arrest Warrant (EAW) was actually created for the needs of countries operating within the European Union so that extradition proceedings would not take long, and it applies to the most serious crimes, explained attorney Paprocki.

”In an extradition trial (…) the court examines the grounds for the charges, examines the evidence, and requests specific explanations, which takes time because the Polish court must be certain about extraditing a citizen to a third party,” said the defense attorney in an interview for Energetyka24/Defence24.com.

The situation is different in the case of the European Arrest Warrant issued for Volodymyr Z. „With the European Arrest Warrant, we have a less formal process based on assurances from member states, limiting the jurisdiction and scope of work of the Polish court to basically a formal, sometimes even administrative, check of the correctness of the request submitted by another member state. And why (…) was this procedure used (in this situation – E24)? (…) It cannot be ruled out that in this particular situation, it is an instrumental use of a mechanism created by member states for other purposes,” believes attorney Paprocki.

This is linked to the fact, as he stated, that the Ukrainian citizen is currently in temporary detention in Poland due to demands and claims made by the German side, which suspects the Ukrainian citizen of destroying critical infrastructure belonging to Gazprom, a company owned by the Russian state. It should be emphasized that the profits of this company are used to finance the war in Ukraine, where „every day people and citizens, brothers, sisters, and friends of the Ukrainian citizen who is in custody are dying.”

”Are you able to understand the connection and the drama of these words and the situation Poland finds itself in?” asked Mr. Paprocki in an interview with E24.

Germany's incomprehensible attitude

He emphasized that the court lacked social and geopolitical sensitivity. „For several days now, since Wednesday to be precise, I have been receiving questions from journalists from Japan, South Africa, Argentina, the United Kingdom, and Canada. How is it possible that a Ukrainian citizen is in Polish custody for actions taken against the aggressor?” he said.

”A trial is about to take place that does not concern only my client, Volodymyr Z., but also many other issues related to the conduct of armed conflicts, the application of international law, and the understanding of this situation,” says attorney Paprocki.

Volodymyr Z.’s defense attorney believes that „Germany’s attitude is incomprehensible, because Germany is prosecuting Ukrainian citizens throughout Europe, instead of focusing all the energy that is being used here on solving the problem of the war in Ukraine, striving for peaceful action or real support for the Ukrainian government fighting the invader.”

„This is very sad, very telling, showing the intentions of a country which, I would like to remind you, at the beginning of this war sent military helmets and cut itself off from helping Ukrainian citizens,” said the lawyer. He added that the situation is now slightly different due to Germany’s interest in rebuilding Ukraine, and financial and economic issues come into play here.

The name of the German crime that appears in the indictment against Volodymyr Z. is „constitutional sabotage.” „Taking into account issues of international law, Polish law, Ukrainian law, and regulations governing armed conflicts, the Polish court will have to consider whether it can definitely say that a crime has been committed by a Ukrainian citizen. I would like to emphasize that regardless of the fact that my client does not admit guilt and I consistently emphasize that he did not commit any crime against Germany, constitutional sabotage, please consider the weight of these words, (…)” said attorney Paprocki.

„So it turns out that Germany’s critical infrastructure subject to protection is Russian property,” he emphasized.

Rule of law in Europe

Volodymyr Z.’s defense attorney also said that his client should not be charged with anything in any European Union country — in countries that pride themselves on the rule of law and justice. In his opinion, Volodymyr Z. can be considered a hero, and his story shows how great the potential responsibility for love of one’s homeland can be.

Recently, Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski said that a person who took part in the sabotage of Nord Stream deserves a medal rather than punishment. However, Volodymyr Z.’s situation shows that these words are not necessarily being fulfilled, at least for now. As attorney Paprocki emphasized, Volodymyr Z. considers Poland his second home.

”The law can be read in different ways, it can be interpreted directly, it can be looked at more broadly, but there is such a thing as the spirit of the law and its application in individual situations in given circumstances. I do not know how to judge this case without considering the geopolitical realities, but the court has proposed such an interpretation of the regulations, which is unfair and unpleasant today, and this is the message that the Polish justice system is sending to the world. It says that since a third country, in particular Germany, is prosecuting someone for constitutional sabotage, it is necessary, perhaps for the sake of peace, to arrest that person. I don’t know how to interpret this,” said the defense attorney.

The EAW in the case of Volodymyr Z. was issued a year ago, which is another key element of the case. „The European Arrest Warrant was issued in June 2024 together with a European Investigation Order. One was to concern the detention and transfer of my client, and the other the search and seizure of evidence. Ultimately, these actions took place in September 2024,” said attorney Paprocki.

The searches were carried out by Polish and German authorities, „which in itself is possible under the law, but I question whether it was necessary and needed.” On that day, Volodymyr Z.’s family was at home, but he was not there. Computers and phones were secured, his absence from home was noted, and the operation was completed. Representatives of the German authorities took the items that had been seized during the search and returned to Germany. And the search for Volodymyr Z. was concluded.

”My client was in Poland and from that moment on he was well aware of the European Arrest Warrant. Why? Because at that stage we had familiarized ourselves with the case files, where we saw the content of the European Arrest Warrant, as well as the documentation gathered at that stage by Germany. We lodged a complaint against the actions taken by Polish and German officers, which was ultimately heard by a Polish court. Power of attorney was granted, and the files were reviewed. The prosecutor’s office knew where my client was. To say that he was not at home that day, which means that since he was not there, he could escape… – I leave it to you to judge how conclusions were drawn in this case,” described attorney Paprocki.

„What is even more shocking is that the court applied pre-trial detention on the grounds that my client uses two passports. (…). Many wondered if he had dual citizenship. No. My client, like every citizen of Ukraine, has two passports. At the time of the search, both were at home. The arresting officers asked for his passport and residence card. And these two documents were handed over. If there had been a question about a third document, the third document would have been handed over. If the prosecutor’s office or the court had asked for this document to be handed over, the family would have deposited it through the defense attorney. Should a person be arrested on this basis, given that at the time the court heard the case, the arresting officers did not ask about it, and should this be given procedural significance? I will leave the answer to this question to you,” he added.

Political shade

The lawyer said that the decision to remand him in custody came as a surprise to him. „It seems to me that someone who buys a property with their family does so in order to live there, not to hide. (…) Yes, I am surprised as a lawyer, I legally disagree with this term. As a citizen of the Republic of Poland, too. I am deeply disappointed,” he emphasized.

We also spoke with Volodymyr Z.’s wife, who confirmed that they had moved to Poland with their children a few days before the full-scale war broke out. She also said that her husband does indeed enjoy diving as a hobby. She expressed her hope that he would be able to return home as soon as possible and, if the prosecutor’s office requested an extension of his pre-trial detention, that he would be able to respond while remaining free. She admitted that, until now, she had never felt any animosity towards Ukrainians in Poland.

„This case certainly has a political context and connotation. (…) Should this mechanism be so informal and one-sided? I think this is a very good question for Polish lawmakers and a fundamental issue for reflection,” concluded attorney Paprocki.

The case is currently being watched by both Polish and international media. It has attracted widespread interest because, regardless of whether Volodymyr Z. participated in the sabotage of Nord Stream or not, it is difficult to understand—at least at this point, based on publicly available information—the behavior of the Polish authorities.