The Sejm dismissed the chair of the National Media Council, Krzysztof Czabański, from his post. Before the ballot, Marshal Szymon Hołownia read Czabański’s letter, written in a firm tone, which first appeared in July on the wPolityce.pl portal.
The Sejm, with the votes of MPs from KO, PSL, Polski 2050, Left and Konfederacja, removed Czabański from RMN. He did not take part in the plenary session where the motion backed by KO deputies was debated. He also skipped yesterday’s meeting of the parliamentary committee on culture and media, which prepared a recommendation on the motion. Czabański offered a clear reason for his absence, citing the political and legal turmoil surrounding public media.
He stated that because the government led by Donald Tusk, with Sejm backing, violated the applicable legal order by seizing and liquidating public media companies, he would not participate in plenary sessions until the situation changes and the rule of law in public media is restored.
Czabański’s rationale was outlined in a letter to Hołownia, and the marshal read it aloud just before the vote.
This sequence underscored the ongoing dispute over the status of public media, with Czabański asserting that until the rule of law returns there is no path for him to participate in Sejm plenary sessions or in the committee’s work on RMN information.
Law? As we understand them…
MPs from the Civic Coalition accused Czabański of violating the ban on combining the role of RMN head with participation in an entity that provides media services or acts as a radio or television producer. The case centers on Czabański’s seat on the Institute’s Council. Lech Kaczyński, described as the majority shareholder of Srebrna and Geranium, is said to have interests in other media ventures such as Gazeta Polska Dzień, niedzielna.pl and Telewizja Republika.
However, the Institute named after Lech Kaczyński does not itself run media activities. Politicians from the ruling bloc who pressed to dismiss Czabański cited legal opinions that broadened the interpretation of the ban. Yet a legal opinion obtained by the wPolityce.pl portal argues that such an expansive reading is not justified.
The law prohibits holding shares or interests in entities that provide media services or otherwise participate in these entities. This prohibition applies to those entities in which a person holds shares or participates.
A legal expert assessed that an overly broad interpretation of the ban would be unacceptable, and this view is reflected in several court decisions.
Related coverage noted the Sejm’s decision and the ensuing debate, including critics who argued the move undermined media freedom and raised questions about legality.
The parliamentary coalition’s stance reflected the ongoing developments as the conflict over public media governance continued to unfold.
Citation omitted.