Paweł Kukiz has been weighing whether his movement should align with Law and Justice as elections approach. The veteran activist and politician outlines clear terms and conditions before any formal partnership would be considered. His stance is straightforward: cooperation hinges on concrete changes and policy wins that matter to his supporters and the broader public.
He has warned that if the PiS-led coalition fails to advance the proposed bills or meet the reform proposals he champions, his bloc will not continue to align with the government in votes and legislative acts. In public statements, Kukiz hints at past talks about a unified start with the ruling party, yet emphasizes that such a move remains contingent on specific reforms being implemented first.
He has noted that there have been discussions about a joint political effort with Law and Justice. However, he asserts that if there are no practical changes such as the establishment of justices of the peace and an overhaul of the referendum law affecting village leaders, mayors, and city presidents, a combined run would not happen. In his words, the path forward will depend on these legal adjustments materializing before any formal alliance is pursued.
According to Kukiz, the electoral calculus remains dynamic. He claims that his party can still command roughly 2 to 3 percent in polls, a range that can decide who gains power in the upcoming political cycle. This margin underscores the leverage his bloc holds in coalition-building conversations and the potential to influence policy direction regardless of whether a formal merger occurs.
From a strategic standpoint, Kukiz argues that PiS has a vested interest in pursuing reforms related to the justice system, including the concept of justices of the peace. He contends that such reforms could accelerate legal proceedings and ease the workload on existing courts, while offering practical pathways for interpreting laws through targeted judicial apprenticeships. The rationale is that a leaner, more efficient system would benefit governance and public confidence, especially in times of political change.
— a practitioner in the political landscape — Kukiz emphasizes that changes to the self-governing framework and the legal architecture around referendums could reshape governance at the local level. He stresses that introducing single-member constituencies and exploring a mixed electoral model could alter the dynamics of representation, potentially strengthening accountability and responsiveness to citizens.
Benefits for PiS
The core argument presented is that the initiative to empower justices of the peace could yield tangible advantages for the ruling party. On one hand, expediting judicial processes would deliver quicker outcomes and reduce the burden on traditional courts. On the other, the governance framework would allow a more streamlined path from policy to practice, with a built-in mechanism for ongoing legal training that could maintain a stable judiciary as politicians navigate reforms.
Supporters of such changes believe they would create a more resilient and practical legal system, capable of handling a broad spectrum of issues with increased efficiency. The emphasis is on pragmatic reform that aligns with the political timetable and the expectations of voters who desire faster, fairer adjudication without compromising the rule of law.
In this context, Kukiz argues that the party’s stance on local referendums and constitutional adjustments to electoral rules remains central to broader political objectives. He contends that any credible plan to transition to a mixed electoral system with single-member constituencies would be a meaningful shift in how citizens’ votes translate into representation. The dialogue around these reforms reflects a broader conversation about modernizing the political system while preserving democratic fidelity.
The discourse surrounding these proposals illustrates how smaller political forces can influence major policy trajectories. By leveraging their influence on issues like the justice framework and electoral design, factions can push for reforms that shape governance outcomes long after specific personalities have moved on. It remains a live debate about how reforms should be sequenced, implemented, and evaluated for their impact on accountability, efficiency, and public trust.