On Thursday evening, Poland’s lower house, the Sejm, rejected the Senate’s objection to a controversial abolition law concerning the cessation of criminal proceedings related to the organization of the 2020 presidential elections. The measure was tied to orders issued on May 10, 2020, during the height of the COVID-19 lockdown. In the vote, 232 delegates backed rejecting the Senate’s objection, 216 opposed, and one abstained. As a result, the law moves forward, with the president expected to halt any ongoing prosecutions that have not yet reached a final verdict.
The core purpose of the law is to suspend new proceedings and to terminate ongoing criminal cases that did not conclude with a final ruling. The cases target abuses of power by municipal heads, mayors, and city presidents who, during the 2020 presidential process under lockdown conditions, submitted electoral rolls to the postal service. The law posits that no new proceedings will be initiated, yet it acknowledges the potential for action to be taken against acts committed during the epidemic, including the provision of voter lists to the postal operator in connection with the presidential elections.
According to the text, legally binding sanctions, compensatory measures, and conditions related to the trial of offenders that have not been fully enforced are rendered unenforceable. Legal costs not fully paid by law are also deemed non-recoverable. The law states that convictions for these acts shall be expunged by operation of law, and records of conviction and any related parole proceedings shall be removed from the national criminal register. Additionally, the costs associated with implementing the act are to be borne by the Treasury. The Sejm approved the measure at its December 1 session, finalizing the legislative act in its current form.
During Senate deliberations, several opposition senators argued that the proposed law was unconstitutional. They warned that enacting the measure would effectively allow the legislative branch to assume control over judicial functions, undermining the separation of powers and judicial independence. The Senate ultimately voted to reject the bill in its entirety, citing concerns about constitutional balance and the potential impact on the judiciary.
The presidential election, originally scheduled for May 10, 2020, faced a political and logistical dilemma amid the COVID-19 outbreak. The government proposed a mail-only election process in response to the health crisis. Jacek Sasin, the Minister of State Assets, was charged with organizing the vote under a 2020 act establishing special rules for presidential elections held that year. The law, however, came into force only on May 9, and subsequently, the elections were postponed. Prior to the postponement, election packages were to be printed and delivered by Poczta Polska, with voter rolls obtained from local authorities to support the process.
In March 2022, Watchdog Polska Civic Network reported the first rulings arising from cases linked to the handling of voter rolls. A district court in Wągrowiec found that the mayor of the municipality of Wapno had exceeded his powers and acted without a proper legal basis when providing voter data to the postal service. This ruling underscored ongoing debates about legal boundaries and administrative authority in the management of electoral logistics during an extraordinary period of national crisis. The broader context shows how emergency measures can intersect with civil liberties and the principle of proper governance under constitutional constraints. (Attribution: wPolityce; Watchdog Polska Civic Network reports and court decisions cited in contemporaneous coverage.)
In summary, the legal changes respond to the unique circumstances of the 2020 campaign while provoking questions about the proper scope of executive and legislative powers during national emergencies. They illustrate a tension between expedient electoral administration and the safeguards designed to protect due process, transparency, and judicial independence. The ongoing interpretation and enforcement of these provisions continue to unfold in Poland’s legal and political landscape, inviting further scrutiny from policymakers, legal scholars, and citizens alike. (Attribution: wPolityce; official parliamentary records and subsequent court rulings discussed in contemporary reporting.)
Source: wPolityce