POLAND Law and Practice Contributed by: Tomasz Konopka, Katarzyna Randzio-Sajkowska, Katarzyna Stradomska-Balcerzyk and Michał Zieliński, Sołtysiński Kawecki & Szlęzak
ting these types of crimes, and these cases should be conducted jointly with other units such as the Inter - nal Security Agency or the Central Anti-Corruption Bureau. From the beginning, the investigation should focus on identifying the perpetrators who are respon - sible for the main acts of this criminal activity. The prosecutor also underlines that securing the fiscal The enforcement agencies have wide powers to gath - er any type of information. Under the provisions of the criminal procedure, any legal person/organisational unit/individual is obliged to assist the authorities con - ducting criminal proceedings by providing requested information. interests of the state is a priority. 2.3 Powers of Investigation Public prosecutors may demand the production of documents or other evidence (including the seizure of electronic devices). Refusal to provide the requested information may result in a dawn raid. Documentation that may serve as evidence should be surrendered at the request of the court, the pub - lic prosecutor, or, in urgent cases, the police or other authorised agency. If the seizure is conducted by the police or another authorised agency acting at its own behest, the person surrendering the documentation may immediately request that the decision approving the seizure be drawn up by the court or the public prosecutor. A person surrendering an object should be advised of that right. The enforcement authorities carrying on criminal pro - ceedings are entitled to summon any person (inter alia, an employee, officer or director of the company) to testify. A person who has been formally summoned as a witness is obliged to appear at the place indi - cated by the authority and to testify. Interrogations generally take place at the premises of the summon - ing authority; however, questioning in a different place (eg, a company’s headquarters) is not ruled out. 2.4 Use of Technology in Investigations Polish law enforcement agencies increasingly utilise advanced technology in white-collar crime investi - gations. The Central Anti-Corruption Bureau (CBA), Police, and prosecutors employ digital forensics tools
to analyse electronic evidence, including computers, mobile devices, and cloud storage systems. Under the Code of Criminal Procedure, authorities may conduct operational control measures, including wiretapping and monitoring of electronic communica - tions, subject to court authorisation. These tools are particularly valuable in corruption, fraud, and money laundering investigations. Financial intelligence units utilise sophisticated data analytics to detect suspicious transaction patterns and potential money laundering activities. The Gen - eral Inspector of Financial Information (GIIF) employs automated systems to analyse reports from obliged institutions and identify high-risk transactions. Additionally, Polish authorities cooperate with interna - tional partners through platforms such as Europol and Interpol, sharing digital evidence and utilising cross- border investigation technologies to combat transna - tional white-collar crime. In this field, law firms possess greater experience. They have expertise in utilising both database analy - sis tools and the latest AI solutions. Proper use of experience and advanced tools allows for more effec - tive defence of client interests in ongoing proceed - ings. Sometimes their appropriate application can even prevent proceedings from being initiated. AI tools perfectly complement the work of experienced White Collar Crime teams and the forensic solutions they employ significantly increasing the efficiency of reviews whilst reducing their costs. 2.5 Internal Investigations Following the adoption of the Whistleblower Pro - tection Act (see 4.4 Whistle-Blower Protection ) an internal investigation is one of the possible follow-up actions taken by a company to assess the truthful - ness and accuracy of the information contained in a whistle-blower’s report. However, the companies often decide to conduct internal investigations not always initiated only by a specific whistle-blower’s report, but also as a result of a decision made by the management to check the correct operation of important internal processes.
233 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook