Security company that arrested Syrian national in Zgorzelec operated illegally

Centrum Szkolenia Specjalnego “Fenix” Spółka z o.o., a security company whose personnel detained a Syrian national in Zgorzelec on 2 February 2016, does not have an official licence for commercial personal and asset protection services, informs the Ministry of the Interior and Administration in a response to the HFHR’s letter.

The Helsinki Foundation asked the Ministry’s Department of Permits and Licences to inquire whether the company had a valid licence for the provision of personal and asset protection services. Let us remind our readers that according to media accounts, a team of the company’s security officers checked the man’s ID and, having decided that he was staying in Poland illegally handed him down to the Border Guard. However, the authorities said that the man was staying in Poland legally because he had a proper legal title to stay in Germany and the right to cross the German-Polish border.

An audit, carried out by the Ministry and the provincial police department of Wrocław, revealed that Fenix provided personal and asset protection services under a consortium agreement concluded with the sole trader entered into the register of business activity under the name of “Leszek Kozakiewicz Centrum Szkolenia Specjalnego Fenix. Oddział usług koncesjonowanych” (Leszek Kozakiewicz’s Centre for Special Training “Fenix”. Licensed services branch). In fact, it was Fenix (a commercial company) that provided security services rather than the sole trader legally authorised to do so.

The Ministry’s letter reads: “In consequence of the irregularities discovered in the course of the audit, on 2 May 2016 the sole trader has been notified in writing of the initiation of administrative proceedings in the matter of revocation of his licence…” The proceedings were launched on the grounds of “a gross violation of the conditions of an officially licenced business activity”, the company’s “failure to obtain a mandatory third party liability insurance policy”, and the fact that it carried out “a business activity in a way that pose a risk to the safety of the public and public order”.