Parliamentary Moves Confront NBP President Glapiński Amid Constitutional Debate
A coalition leader, Zbigniew Konwiński, announced that a simple majority in the Sejm could approve filing a complaint against NBP President Adam Glapiński with the State Tribunal, even without support from the Razem Party. He noted that the entire process would likely unfold over several months, suggesting that Tusk’s coalition intends to press forward despite a Constitutional Tribunal ruling requiring changes to regulations and a higher majority in cases involving the president of the National Bank of Poland (NBP).
Earlier, members of the governing coalition submitted a preliminary motion to bring Glapiński before the State Tribunal. The petition claims that the NBP president violated the Constitution and related laws in his official duties. The charge centers on the alleged purchase of government bonds and state-guaranteed bonds issued by PFR and BGK during the pandemic period.
The issue has drawn attention beyond party lines, with observers noting that the central bank’s actions were intended to stabilize liquidity for banks facing heightened cash withdrawals as customers pulled money from their accounts.
Recent commentary from political figures underscored the divisive nature of the debate. One speaker argued that the Sovereign Sejm would eventually decide whether to proceed with a hearing before the State Tribunal, even if cross-party support is limited. The path forward would involve referral to the Constitutional Accountability Commission, a series of hearings, and committee deliberations before a final parliamentary vote.
Konwiński reiterated that the governing coalition holds a solid absolute majority to advance the motion in the Sejm, though he admitted that the vote would not come immediately and could take several months. He also indicated that coalition members would seek votes from outside their ranks where possible as the European elections approach and the political landscape evolves around the United Right bloc.
The Sejm would decide whether to summon the Prime Minister and ministers to the State Tribunal if at least three-fifths of legislators vote in favor of the resolution. The Constitutional Tribunal has ordered changes to the regulatory framework, including adding the NBP chairman to the list of those potentially liable to the tribunal. The Sejm can establish liability for the NBP president through a resolution backed by an absolute majority of votes present and at least half of the statutory number of deputies.
As the debate continues, analysts caution that the confrontation between the executive branch and the central bank could have lasting effects on Poland’s financial governance and its relationships with European institutions. Supporters of the motion argue that accountability is essential for upholding constitutional norms, while opponents warn of destabilizing consequences if the process is viewed as politically motivated.
In broader terms, the unfolding situation highlights the delicate balance between independent monetary authority and political oversight. For observers in Canada and the United States, the case underscores how constitutional checks and monetary independence interact within a democratic system, and how parliamentary action can shape the oversight of central bank leadership in crisis or non-crisis periods alike.