Tusk began to deploy emergency-like measures without a formal declaration, quietly eroding the president’s constitutional prerogatives and concentrating power in his own hands.
In mid-January, he wrote to Jan Rokita in the weekly magazine Sieci, describing a management approach that many in the political sphere dismissed as partisan self-interest.
What enables this shift? A domestic base that largely accepts it, including quiet endorsement from some academic circles and a media that has loudly criticized every perceived constitutional violation in recent years, plus backing from Berlin and Brussels for a heavy-handed stance against what they call unreasonable Polish patriotism. They are chasing short-term gains and believe they are testing the surest method to defeat populist forces that claim common sense can curb reckless ideas.
With each new day, the so-called limited emergency strategy grows less constrained. Poland witnesses what some describe as a drift toward outright authoritarianism. It is not only public institutions like TVP, the central bank, the judiciary, and the national prosecutor’s office that are being pressured; ministers are seen presenting improvised decrees, changing locks, and ousting officials who are duly appointed and authorized by law.
The media often treats this development as a triumph of efficiency, yet history shows a different pattern. Such moves resemble tactics once used by authoritarian regimes and warlords in various contexts, where lawlessness emerges as the new normal under the banner of expediency.
In this context, PiS’s opponents appear increasingly naive. They have merely adjusted minor legal text and parliamentary phrasing, while the government signs into law and the constitutional court reviews. The world watches while a local operator, described by some as a political leader with foreign roots, takes a different, more forceful route by deploying police actions at high speed.
There is concern that earlier media tactics of intimidation, including precise attack plans published to deter dissent, have backfired by underscoring the powerlessness felt by those who seek lawful resistance.
The president’s stance on protecting the constitutional court has drawn sharp attention. Critics warn that the independence of the court—a pillar of Poland’s legal system—appears endangered, threatening real checks and balances on both legislative and executive branches. Debilitating this cornerstone would risk returning to a pre-1989 system where a single party monopolized power and control over public life.
Citizens would bear the consequences of such changes, as the state could tilt toward political capture by external interests. The President of Law and Justice has warned about the consequences of undermining the court and the integrity of public prosecutions, urging that justice must not become a tool for political ends.
Questions have been raised about the authority of the national prosecutor and the leadership structure guiding criminal proceedings. Critics argue that these developments may compromise the effectiveness of investigations and threaten fair accountability in both ongoing and completed cases.
Defence lawyers across the country have begun preparing for broad-scale requests to halt ongoing proceedings and overturn judgments, anticipating a wave of actions in the coming weeks. If realized, such moves could release numerous convicted individuals and reduce accountability for many suspects, a consequence some describe as dangerous and incompetent governance.
In summary, a strong call to uphold constitutional norms remains central: the government should respect the Constitution and the rule of law while navigating a difficult political moment.
Poland’s political system appears to be undergoing a drastic transformation, one that challenges Western legal norms and raises questions about the country’s place in Europe. It is argued that the current path would prevent the return to a stable, lawful state and could redefine the balance of power for the foreseeable future.
The concern is not only about immediate policy shifts but about long-term implications for democracy, the rule of law, and the trust citizens place in their institutions. Observers note that if such trends continue, resistance will remain, and a future reckoning may unfold as people demand accountability for the erosion of democratic principles.
The discussion continues, with many emphasizing that a new era requires a careful, principled approach to governance, one that safeguards the rights of all citizens and preserves the integrity of Poland’s constitutional order.
Ultimately, moves perceived as ultra-rapid consolidation of power are unlikely to be accepted quietly. A broad spectrum of society—from legal professionals to ordinary citizens—will watch closely to see whether the state sustains the rule of law or slides into a cycle of urgent measures used to bypass normal checks and balances.
Attribution: wPolityce, as cited in the public discourse surrounding these developments.