Poland 2050’s position on subsidies remains unchanged following the National Electoral Commission’s decision to reject its financial report, since the party did not receive the grant in question. This clarification follows the PKW’s rejection of Poland 2050’s 2021 financial report and subsequent steps by the Supreme Court, with the Polish Press Agency seeking details about possible budgetary implications for Szymon Hołownia’s party.
The official response confirms that Poland 2050 will not face financial penalties or reductions in funding as a result of the PKW ruling.
Because Szymon Hołownia’s Polska 2050 Party did not qualify for state subsidies during the Sejm’s 2019-2023 term, the PKW rejection and any related Supreme Court outcomes do not strip the party of a grant it never held. In other words, there is no earned entitlement to be lost in this case, according to the KBW.
KBW explains that losing a subsidy for three consecutive years requires the party to have had an entitlement in the first place. The relevant rule in the Political Parties Act states that if the PKW rejects a party’s report, or if the Supreme Court upholds that rejection on appeal, the party loses the right to receive the subsidy in the next three years during which it would otherwise be eligible. The calculation begins in the quarter after the notification is rejected, and if an appeal is filed, the period runs from the quarter after the date the appeal is rejected by the Supreme Court. This is a statutory provision.
Jacek Kozłowski, a board member and treasurer of Polska 2050, told PAP there are no subsidy-related consequences arising from the PKW’s decision that the Supreme Court upheld. He stressed that although the law mentions a three-year loss of entitlement, it applies only to a subsidy that is active at the moment the decision is issued.
He recalled that the grant’s entitlement ends in the quarter following the PKW report’s rejection and, in the event of an appeal, from the quarter after the High Court’s rejection. Therefore, the party cannot lose a grant that it does not possess.
Looking ahead, the party believes future elections could restore eligibility for a subsidy, but it would be a new grant under a fresh term, unaffected by prior losses since the entitlement would end with the current term. Kozłowski noted that subsidies are not retroactively lost because of this decision, provided the party earns the right to them in a new term.
As emphasized, the outcome of the current decision does not erase the potential for subsidies after elections, so long as the party achieves the necessary result. The reputational impact of the ruling is felt more acutely than the financial one, with many perceiving opacity in party funding and facing political attacks as a result.
Campaign dynamics in play
Kozłowski also highlighted a second challenge tied to the party’s image. It is essential for the Polska 2050 team to secure funding for campaigning, especially given the limited financial resources available. He stated that the party has not received any subsidies or grant money to date and relies entirely on voluntary contributions from members and supporters, which are not substantial in scale.
He compared Polska 2050’s revenue to that of other parties, pointing to 2022 figures showing a total turnover of around PLN 700,000 for the party, versus a grant-related receipt of PLN 23.3 million for PiS in the same year.
On the possibility of pursuing the matter at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg in light of Tuesday’s Supreme Court ruling, the party’s treasurer conceded that the case could take several years to unfold. The discussion about next steps reflects ongoing concerns about funding and how the ruling will influence future electoral strategy. (wPolityce)