A group of MPs from Donald Tusk’s government filed a preliminary motion to bring the president of the National Bank of Poland before the State Tribunal. Law and Justice members discussed the issue during a press briefing. They warned that this could align with a broader political plan tied to Brussels and the possible adoption of the euro in Poland. Rafał Bochenek, a PiS spokesman, stated that the move targets a plan to shift the central bank away from its role ahead of euro introduction in Poland.
On Tuesday, 191 MPs from the ruling coalition signed a preliminary motion to summon NBP President Adam Glapiński to the State Tribunal. PiS lawmakers raised the issue during the press conference, outlining potential consequences. They argued that the motive is not to assess Professor Glapiński’s conduct, but to enable significant policy changes in Poland that fit their larger political goals.
The campaign against the National Bank of Poland is underway. A preliminary note about the State Tribunal case against Glapiński emerged, and one PiS member sharply criticized the situation as a smear aimed at discrediting the central bank and those defending its independence.
Application against the President of the National Bank of Poland
The issue centers not only on Professor Glapiński but on a political strategy linked to Donald Tusk’s leadership. The aim is to push through reforms that could precede euro entry in Poland, with the current management of the NBP seen as instrumental to that path.
Bochenek described the move as a strategic maneuver aimed at aligning Poland with a broader European framework while emphasizing concerns about constitutional independence and legal procedures.
As Krzysztof Szczucki noted, the NBP performs essential duties. It is responsible for the country’s money supply and, by extension, for upholding Polish constitutional and legal standards, as well as European law guarantees. He stressed that the central bank’s independence is strongly protected by both Polish and European frameworks.
At the same time, the Constitution provides a mechanism for holding the NBP President constitutionally liable before the State Tribunal. It does not specify a precise parliamentary majority for such action, a matter governed by the State Tribunal Act. That law previously required an absolute majority to remove the NBP President before the State Tribunal, a standard that could allow a government majority to impair the central bank’s functioning or suspend its president.
Szczucki added that the current proposal seemed inconsistent with both the Constitution and European law.
Therefore, PiS lawmakers submitted a request to the Constitutional Tribunal, which acknowledged in January that the State Tribunal Act could infringe the independence of the NBP and that removing the president would require at least a three-fifths majority. Szczucki emphasized this constitutional nuance and the impact on the central bank’s autonomy.
He recalled that PiS members had prepared a draft amendment to the State Tribunal law earlier in January and noted that it had not yet been considered. Marshal Hołownia claimed that he did not have a freezer in his office, but only after a month did he forward the bill to the Constitutional Responsibility Committee for its first reading, which has not occurred yet. This is the reality of parliamentary work and implies that indicting the NBP President before the State Tribunal cannot be advanced. The ruling coalition has nonetheless filed a request to depose Adam Glapiński and hold him constitutionally liable.
Szczucki also noted that PiS MPs submitted another request to the Constitutional Court on March 6. This time the focus was on the operating principles and procedures of the Constitutional Accountability Commission. It was argued that the commission should not hold the power to investigate the President of the National Bank of Poland because that prerogative could undermine the central bank’s independence. A body free of the current political majority should handle such investigations, according to the PiS MP.
Activities of Prof. Glapiński
The case against Prof. Glapiński in the Court of Justice includes eight charges. They cover alleged constitutional and National Bank of Poland Act violations related to asset purchases in 2020 and 2021. He is accused of actions between 2021 and 2023 that allegedly deviated from established monetary policy expectations. The campaign against the NBP president was highlighted during the PiS press conference.
Critics argue that the allegations misrepresent his constitutional and legal duties. They contend Poland managed the COVID crisis and subsequent economic challenges well and that inflation has fallen under his leadership, asserting that the coalition’s actions amount to political maneuvering to divert attention from perceived missteps by Donald Tusk regarding state institutions, a charge the PiS side rejects as unfair political rhetoric.
According to Szczucki, the eight points listed by the applicants include claims that the NBP financed the budget deficit, which would violate the Constitution. Proponents of the NBP counter that the central bank used quantitative easing, a widely accepted tool employed by major central banks, including the European Central Bank, over many years.
The second claim concerns the president reporting profits and losses for the year. With a foreign exchange reserve of around 170 billion euros, a stronger zloty could produce a paper loss when those reserves are converted. Thus, the president had to present the reported loss to reflect the situation accurately. The third issue concerns cooperation between the NBP president and the government majority. Recent years featured extraordinary events, including the COVID crisis and Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, which shaped policy responses.
The argument here is that the central bank’s cooperation with the government was essential to navigating the global economic downturn. The point is that it was the central bank’s duty to maintain that cooperation rather than undermine it.
Kuźmiuk stressed that the measures taken during the crisis emphasized the need for coordinated action. He noted that the initial global economic collapse was followed by targeted steps to mitigate inflation without excessive money creation, which was seen as prudent given the circumstances.
Tusk’s plan for the eurozone
The current actions against the NBP President are framed as connected to the prime minister’s EU commitments. The discussion centers on a report outlining a pledge made in Brussels. The argument is that, in exchange for political support in Poland, the pledge may have implied eventual euro adoption. The RM2 framework is described as a gateway to the eurozone, and the belief is that the broader operation seeks to replace the central bank leadership with a collaborator who would advance euro integration alongside the finance minister.
Kuźmiuk suggested that Tusk might aim to bring Poland into the eurozone. Given the weak grounds for challenging the president before the State Tribunal, the underlying question is what the operation truly seeks to achieve. The prevailing view is that eurozone entry, specifically RM2, would require the signature of both the NBP President and the Finance Minister. This aligns with the assertion that the government majority would be responsible for such decisions while the central bank has repeatedly stated that euro adoption will not occur during its current term.
As Kuźmiuk explained, entering RM2 is equivalent to joining the eurozone. The broader impact involves economic adaptation and costs borne by society and businesses. Poland’s neighbor Slovakia joined the eurozone in 2009; data from 2022 shows Poland’s GDP per capita, measured by purchasing power parity, remains competitive with or ahead of many euro area economies, underscoring the potential benefits of currency alignment for long-term economic leadership.
Waldemar Buda highlighted that Poles have recently faced rising prices and unmet promises to lower costs. He pointed to VAT increases on food, upcoming energy price adjustments, and missed tax relief measures, along with the withdrawal of a promised tax-free threshold, arguing that if Poland joined the eurozone, purchasing power would likely decline. He contended that this pattern has occurred in other countries after euro adoption, suggesting that joining now could slow development momentum.