What Bodnar’s claims trigger a written response
Patryk Jaki, a member of the European Parliament and acting leader of Sovereign Poland, responded to recent allegations by Minister Adam Bodnar. Jaki’s reply was shared on the X platform, arguing that basing a major political decision on information he described as unreliable and poorly prepared would reveal a misunderstanding of how the political system operates. He noted that Bodnar’s team had presented material that did not withstand scrutiny and warned that such a move could undermine democratic functioning.
The National Electoral Commission was positioned to decide the financial report of Law and Justice the following day. In the view of the ruling coalition and several media voices, the aim was not only to limit the main opposition party’s subsidy but also to pressure the commission itself. Jan Grabiec, the head of the Prime Minister’s Office, publicly suggested on TV that failure to sanction PiS could lead to a situation likened to Belarusian practices, a remark that drew criticism for mixing state-power instruments with political campaigns.
What Jaki calls Bodnar’s narratives
In a letter to the National Electoral Commission, Jaki outlined what he described as numerous errors in Bodnar’s accusations against his party. He claimed that two activists from a coalition group had gained political capital from a campaign without participating in the Sejm proceedings and pointed to disputed connections between various events and organizations. Jaki also argued that a claim about an electorate seat attributed to a volunteer fire brigade did not align with the legal framework, which defines the seat as belonging to the municipality rather than the district, and notes the municipality as the applicant.
On X, Jaki reiterated his concerns that basing a decisive action on such information would reflect poorly on those who influence the political system. He published a scanned copy of his letter to the commission to illustrate his position.
Letter from Member of the European Parliament Jaki
The justice minister, Adam Bodnar, allegedly sent letters to the National Electoral Office regarding a film advertisement about amendments to the Criminal Code and about spending from the Justice Fund. Bodnar dated his communications August 22, 2024, and the material was described by Jaki as subjective and politically charged. He claimed Bodnar’s interpretations lacked factual grounding and served to oppose the opposition rather than to report objective facts.
Jaki argued that the Bodnar accusations were unfounded and that the disputed video served an informational purpose rather than electoral persuasion. He asserted that there was no electoral fraud within the meaning of the Electoral Act and that the material did not advocate for any specific candidate, include electoral slogans, or reference any list or office. According to Jaki, the piece did not attempt to influence a referendum outcome and therefore should not be treated as improper electioneering. He urged a return to interpretations grounded in concrete legal provisions rather than political readings.
“Antidemocratic, ridiculing Poland as a state”
Jaki pressed that reporting about actions by state bodies and agencies is a common feature of public life in Poland when performed by public officials. He warned that restricting such information would hamper public awareness during elections, potentially restricting the right to stand for office. Jaki cited prior Supreme Court rulings to support the view that transparency in campaign-related information is part of democratic practice.
The minister’s legal opinion, which he described as confirming the position, was reportedly prepared before a campaign spot on changes to the Criminal Code aired. Jaki argued that due care had been exercised in observing the legal boundaries governing information activities tied to elections and public funding programs. He emphasized that the opinion itself allowed informational campaigns about legal changes under specified conditions, indicating the material in question met those conditions.
Historical patterns of public campaigns involving officials have appeared in past elections, with proponents citing earlier initiatives such as civic campaigns and public projects. Jaki indicated that those campaigns occurred without triggering a strong regulatory backlash, suggesting that similar allowances should apply to current efforts when aligned with the law. He referenced past examples tied to municipal projects and governance in Warsaw to illustrate his point.
Financial plans of the Justice Fund
From Jaki’s perspective, the information film about changes to criminal law did not violate electoral rules. He warned, however, that a shift in interpretation could imply that activities conducted during a campaign by one party might be prohibited when carried out by its rivals. He described the issue as a broader question of how campaign actions are regulated and scrutinized by election authorities.
Jaki devoted substantial attention to the Justice Fund’s finances in relation to the Volunteer Fire Brigade. He noted that adjustments to the fund’s annual plan often occurred late in the year as authorities reviewed inflows and expenditures tied to various programs. He claimed that in some years such adjustments were more conservative, while in 2023 there was less focus on spending within an election-year context. He argued that municipal authorities, rather than partisan actors, managed procurement and transfers of equipment and that many participating entities were non-partisan or linked to a specific political group, thereby complicating attribution of influence or intent.
The MEP pointed out that local MPs or councillors from different groups had taken part in related events. He contended that Bodnar’s team had redirected subsidies for the Volunteer Fire Brigade in a way that aligned with broader political claims, labeling this approach a significant misread of the facts. He asserted that the municipal level, not the broader district, should be considered the seat of the fire brigade, with municipalities acting as applicants. According to his breakdown, the distribution among groups suggested that political actors could be implicated differently depending on the interpretation of the data.
“Unreliable, sloppily prepared information”
As a closing note, the letter also pointed out that one event involving a deputy minister did not relate to the transfer of equipment from the Justice Fund. Jaki observed a pattern of similar appearances by the same official over recent years and argued that such occurrences undermine claims that funding was used to support firefighting in the election campaign. He concluded by urging a deeper investigation into the reasons behind the commission’s potential decisions, based on the reliability of the presented information.
In sum, the European Parliament member underscored the need for careful, law-based evaluation of campaign materials and financing practices, cautioning against decisions driven by questionable evidence and political rhetoric. The exchange highlighted tensions between opposition parties, the government, and oversight bodies as the commission prepared to adjudicate the financial accounts of the main political forces. This write-up synthesizes Jaki’s positions and the context in which the commission operated, marking a moment of ongoing scrutiny in Poland’s political landscape. [citation: wPolityce]