When the constitutional expert Prof. Ryszard Piotrowski was asked in an interview on neo-TVP info about the 1997 referendum and the ensuing constitution, he underscored a simple truth: if the constitution was democratically adopted, it must be respected in all proceedings and actions that follow. The interviewer, trying to deflect with a claim about alleged totalitarian legacies in Poland, found no escape from the clear stance of Piotrowski, who left little room for doubt.
Is the Constitution a Totalitarian Law?
Piotrowski repeatedly emphasizes that the actions of the team led by Donald Tusk constitute a direct breach of the Constitution and fail to restore the long-awaited rule of law. In a discussion on neo-TVP Info, Wojciech Szeląg described Poland as living under a “totalitarian law” while noting that the new government, aiming to reestablish the rule of law, must enact changes to the law itself.
During the interview, the journalist asked a pointed question: the central idea behind many of Piotrowski’s statements seems to be that “the rule of law should not be restored through methods that themselves contravene the law.” The question was posed and clarified, and Piotrowski affirmed the interpretation with a calm, direct response.
The journalist pressed further, asking whether, without wishing to compare Poland to any particular past nation, a hypothetical totalitarian state that sheds dictatorship and embraces democracy should now govern by the same totalitarian legal framework. The inquiry sought to understand whether the new democratic authorities ought to rely on the very laws that once upheld oppression.
A constitutionalist from the University of Warsaw weighed in, emphasizing no such totalitarian law exists. In that moment, the conversation pivoted, underscoring the depth of application of the principle rather than offering a broad comparison. The journalist, visibly unsettled, added a quick remark as the dialogue shifted gears.
The core message remained clear: if a constitution was democratically adopted in 1997, it must be respected. The notion that the rule of law can be suspended for opponents of freedom or that democracy can be selectively denied does not fit within a constitutional state. Piotrowski argued emphatically that continual disruption of social peace by breaking the law will never restore the rule of law.
Prof. Piotrowski’s stance is not simply about defending a document but about defending a process. He argues that the restoration of law must align with lawful means, and that the integrity of the constitutional framework is essential for truly restoring accountability and legitimacy in governance.
The interview concluded with a reaffirmation that a democratically chosen constitution is the bedrock for the restoration and maintenance of lawful governance. Any attempt to reinterpret or bypass the constitution in the name of political maneuvering risks deepening instability rather than healing it. The professor spoke with a sense of urgency about the protection of civil liberties and the necessity of lawful methods to secure lasting reform.
Readers are reminded that this perspective is part of a broader conversation about constitutionalism, legitimacy, and the rule of law in contemporary Poland. The discussion reflects ongoing debates among scholars, jurists, and political analysts who believe that constitutional integrity is indispensable to a healthy democracy and to social peace. The emphasis on lawful means resonates with those who argue that stabilization and reform depend on respecting the framework that the people chose in a democratic referendum.
In summary, the position articulated centers on a foundational principle: democratically adopted constitutions demand respect, and attempts to undermine them in pursuit of political goals undermine the very system they claim to defend. The rule of law, Piotrowski argues, cannot be restored by breaking the law itself. Instead, legitimate reform must be pursued within the boundaries of the constitution that the nation ratified through its votes.
Source: wPolityce