A wave of criticism has emerged around Donald Tusk, as described by Daniel Milewski, a member of parliament from Law and Justice, in a discussion with the wPolityce.pl portal.
Prime Minister Tusk faced questions after choosing to back President Andrzej Duda in appointing a judge who began his tenure after 2017 to chair the Civil Chamber assembly of judges in the Supreme Court. Milewski commented on this in the interview with wPolityce.pl.
The sense conveyed is that Tusk acknowledges the ongoing functioning of the rule of law, including constitutional prerogatives exercised by the President of Poland. The opposition and segments of the judiciary often labeled as an “extraordinary caste” have repeatedly challenged the system, and Milewski notes that Tusk appears to welcome this public scrutiny.
Milewski adds that when the moment for a decision arrived and signature was needed, Tusk hesitated, possibly out of concern for accountability. This hesitation is described as a hallmark of the present government, with Milewski arguing that reforms are framed as a battle against the ruling PiS party and that such framing undermines the law and the Constitution. The narrative portrays Tusk’s administration as clouded by hostility, with only looming consequences capable of tempering that sentiment.
Discontent of the “caste”
The appointment sparked anger among some judges who are described as part of the so‑called caste. In Milewski’s view, the decision itself was not shocking, yet certain judges seek revenge for reforms that reduced some had previously privileged status. This, he suggests, is where the anger toward Donald Tusk concentrates.
“We see a reaction from the judiciary, who feel their status has been altered,” explains the PiS MP. [Citation: Milewski, interview with wPolityce.pl]
“We will increasingly see situations where Donald Tusk does not keep his promises.”
The rising tension within the judiciary is not the only factor fueling discontent with the December 13 Coalition. Milewski notes that a growing number of actions and statements from Tusk hint at loyalties that may extend beyond Poland. This could lead to more instances where promises are not kept or where the will of voters is not prioritized. The aim, according to Milewski, is to reduce Poland’s standing in Europe, and the slogans that propelled Tusk to power may have shifted to other strategic calculations.
Daniel Milewski offers this interpretation, noting that while some factions within the ruling camp still support the coalition, others perceive a shift in focus away from domestic resilience toward broader political calculations. The overarching message is that the relationship between the government and the judiciary remains a flashpoint, with strategic messaging and legal actions continually tested against constitutional norms.
Readers are invited to consider how these political dynamics influence Poland’s governance and the balance of power between the executive branch and the judiciary. The ongoing debate raises questions about accountability, constitutional prerogatives, and the practical implications for the rule of law in Poland today. [Citation: political commentary, Milewski discussion with wPolityce.pl]