Michał Karnowski sits down with Jacek Sasin, MP for Law and Justice and Minister of State Resources, for the first part of an expansive interview that outlines government actions. The second part, focused on state and economic affairs, would appear the following Monday in the weekly magazine Sieci.
Michał Karnowski asks why Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki, despite a parliamentary coalition formed by PO, TD, and the Left, is underscoring a bid to assemble his own government and secure a majority for it.
Sasin responds by reframing the question: why wouldn’t the prime minister pursue a majority? He argues that parliamentary tradition and the expectations of voters — who fear the potential damage of Tusk’s governance — drive such moves. He calls it an investment in the future, noting that diverse groups in the Sejm should be shown they do not have to accept the status quo under Tusk and that a fresh majority is possible, one that would enact change without embracing everything associated with Tusk.
The interviewer probes whether it is feasible to shift the majority within this term.
Sasin tempers expectations, saying he cannot predict the future, but he asserts that the party will persist in seeking opportunities. He acknowledges the current mood in the Sejm — emotions and euphoria — while emphasizing that governance will require hard work, difficult decisions, and painful but necessary choices. Only then might their offer win over some observers.
The discussion shifts to the Sejm’s character, described by Sasin as not merely a legislative body but a televised spectacle dominated by personalities. He notes the visual appeal of public life: Ukraine’s presidential race won by an actor and a TV figure occupying the Sejm’s chair. He credits Hołownia, hoping for fair and equal treatment of all clubs, yet laments that fundamental rights appear compromised and that some external forces seek to determine who should represent the public. He contends the party will not yield seats in the Presidium of the Sejm or the Senate in exchange for concessions. Over time, he suggests, Hołownia must appreciate that disrespect for the Sejm would harm its dignity and the work it performs, a burden he believes lies more heavily on Hołownia than on his own side.
The host questions Hołownia’s apparent disgust at occasional loud moments from PiS MPs and his threat to summon participants to a dim room, to which Sasin responds with understanding, characterizing it as a rough start and a sign of inexperience. He points out that Hołownia is new to the Sejm and that routine parliamentary debates include normal rhetoric the world over. He contends that the opposition in earlier times did not always conduct themselves with restraint, and questions where Hołownia was when his coalition partners engaged in disruptive conduct in the past.
The interviewer asks about potential parliamentary stalemate on legislative projects.
Sasin argues that governing cannot happen by voting everything through at once. He suggests that a redefined mechanism for building hierarchy and order will emerge under a different banner.
He notes the Confederacy’s intention to overturn the table, implying they may have since settled for a more measured approach.
Referring to the first parliamentary sessions, he mentions Grzegorz Braun’s sharp attack on the speaker, Elżbieta Witek, describing it as significant. He views these actions as part of Tusk’s system, predicting these players will align with his orchestra and be used to attack the government. He avoids labeling them as either useful idiots or cynical players, but asserts that Polish patriots will not count on them in coming months of Poland’s political struggle.
Three or four commissions of inquiry are anticipated soon. Does this worry him?
Not at all. The main takeaway, he says, is that committees will aim to distract the public from governance difficulties, from the failure to implement promises through political theater, and from a hunt directed at Law and Justice supporters. He asks what the visa scandal inquiry might uncover and notes that up to 300 cases involving visas had already been identified by state services during the current regime. He emphasizes that nothing has been hidden, guilty parties will be charged, and justice will run its course. He accuses the opposition of sensationalism and deceit, suggesting their stories are fantasies.
The discussion touches on postal elections and the potential for a thorough examination of what has been built around those events. Sasin expresses willingness to engage in such a forum, clarifying there was no scandal, only a dramatic situation born from a pandemic and a constitutional obligation to hold elections.
He recalls how media framing shifted from portraying PiS as steering toward elections to portraying PiS as failing to organize elections, a narrative he attributes to cynicism by the opposition. He contends their actions followed legal avenues, with the Supreme Audit Office’s findings and the president’s stance cited as part of the complex picture. He argues there is a lack of logical consistency in the opposing assessments.
Beyond investigative committees, he accuses opponents of using illegal instruments to seize power in public media and to bypass the National Media Council, and of attempting to replace National Council for the Judiciary members via resolutions, or threatening to use the State Tribunal against the central bank governor. He questions these communications and their implications for democracy.
He notes protesters wear shirts bearing the word Constitution, yet argues the opposition has not spoken about the rule of law with the seriousness it deserves and believes a mere parliamentary majority should not determine the terms of office, procedures, or the constitution itself. He mentions European law and the governor of the central bank, criticizing attempts to alter not only laws but the constitution itself. He accuses Donald Tusk of threatening force as he advocates pulling state officials from their posts. He describes the situation as a dangerous drift away from democracy.
Asked how they will respond, Sasin answers that the government will resist with full strength and will not stay silent. He also warns against breaking the law, echoing remarks from a fellow minister that those who do will be held accountable. He stresses that despite propaganda, the government has not violated the constitution or the law, citing recent television interviews as proof of the stance of opponents who continue to level accusations.
Looking to the future of Law and Justice, he addresses potential changes and notes that the departure of President Jarosław Kaczyński would be a significant blow to the faction. He emphasizes the president’s unifying authority, vast experience, and pivotal role in guiding the party through victories and a broad spectrum of opinions. Sasin believes the party urgently needs new channels of communication with the Polish people, a new language, new formats of policy, and a program capable of drawing in voters who currently oppose them.
He considers whether the political calendar — local elections in six months, followed by European and presidential elections — works in their favor. The advantage, he says, is that their camp will enter the political arena immediately, but the downside includes the long-term effects of the recently won parliamentary elections and the lingering impact of the Liberal government’s policies, which he believes remain to be seen. He expresses confidence that their bloc can overcome these challenges and perform well.
Note: the discussion reflects ongoing parliamentary dynamics and strategic considerations within Poland’s current government and opposition landscape.