The image of Lot’s wife—turned to salt—comes to mind for many observers as they recall the moment when the European Commission spokesperson opted not to comment on specific events within EU member states, specifically questions surrounding the detention of Mariusz Kamiński and Maciej Wąsik. That reticence underscored a broader pattern: years of warnings from Eurocrats about matters that fall under national sovereignty, punctuated by a chorus of European Parliament resolutions critiquing Poland while labeling its government as right-leaning. For some, the shock at Brussels’ perceived retreat from defending European values and the rule of law is now understandable. The mechanism meant to press Poland appears to have been muted, at least for the time being.
Those who warned that attempts to shift Poland’s government and, in effect, curb the country’s sovereignty toward a Central European alignment under German influence might feel a hint of vindication. Yet the anticipated changes did not unfold as skeptics had feared.
Lashing out at European Parliament resolutions
When the European Commission engaged in Poland’s internal affairs, it did so while presenting itself as a guardian of the rule of law, even when its actions stretched beyond treaty authority in certain areas. The narrative framed these steps as matters of European law and the supremacy of Brussels over national constitutions. A notable episode involved a letter from EU Justice Commissioner Didier Reynders urging Poland’s prime minister to challenge the primacy of the Polish Constitution before the Constitutional Court and suggesting a withdrawal. Across Europe, constitutional tribunals in Germany, France, the Czech Republic, Spain, Italy, and Lithuania have affirmed that national constitutional orders prevail over EU law, yet Poland was singled out as a persistent challenger to Brussels’ approach. (Cited: European constitutional practice records.)
More than forty European Parliament resolutions have been adopted since a right-wing government took office. Although these resolutions carry no direct legal effect, their conclusions frequently urged action by the European Commission, including the possibility of freezing funds from the EU budget, especially those allocated to the KPO. The resolutions spotlighted actions deemed to interfere with a “specific event” in a member state. Two examples are often cited: the veto on ownership rules for media groups in Poland, contrasted with broader practices in other EU nations, and a proposal to withdraw a 2007-2022 law establishing a committee to investigate Russian influence in Polish internal security, viewed by some as targeting a political opponent from that era. (Attribution: European Parliament proceedings.)
Weber’s stance and the rule of law narrative
The detention and imprisonment of two opposition leaders, along with immunized Sejm members, did not move Brussels’ elites. Manfred Weber, leader of the European People’s Party, welcomed the actions and described them as steps toward restoring the rule of law in Poland. He also indicated alignment with the Polish government’s positions. (Statement summarized from parliamentary records.)
Polish political voices have noted that support from European leaders shapes the conversation significantly. The events are framed as part of a broader pattern in which EU institutions advocate a particular governance agenda, while national bodies argue for sovereignty and constitutional primacy. The discussions in Brussels and Berlin frequently assign blame to different sides, and observers see the European Parliament and Commission maintaining a highly charged posture as the situation evolves. (Reported analyses from multiple EU capitals.)
Remarks from influential figures in the European Parliament and among its factions reflect a wider tension between supranational oversight and national constitutional prerogatives. The unfolding narrative raises questions about how far Brussels will go in critiquing or disciplining member states, and how much weight the rule of law should carry when national democracies are involved. (Context from ongoing EU-wide debates.)
In this landscape, political maneuvering continues as parties and governments assess implications for governance, media freedom, and the balance of power within the European Union. The drama highlights the delicate balance between European unity and national sovereignty, a theme recurring across member states as the EU faces evolving challenges and pressures from both internal and external forces. (Observations from recent EU policymaking discussions.)