A Twitter exchange unfolded when Sebastian Kaleta, the Deputy Minister of Justice and a member of Sovereign Poland, sent two pointed questions to former Polish foreign minister Jacek Czaputowicz. The volley followed Czaputowicz’s interview on TOK FM, where he criticized reforms to Poland’s judiciary.
Former Foreign Affairs Chief Gives an Interview
In a dialogue with editor Jacek Żakowski, Czaputowicz argued that Sovereign Poland played a role in diminishing Poland’s sovereignty.
According to him, the party led by Zbigniew Ziobro contributed to a notable weakening of sovereignty. He pointed out reforms that have found consent not only within the European Commission but also across most coalition groups, he noted.
He described Sovereign Poland’s stance as a sweeping move that undermines sovereignty, even jokingly calling the name a running joke of the year.
Czaputowicz contended that the European Commission now wields tools to guide Polish reforms, shaping their direction.
He argued that the KPO money was not fully paid because, although Poland enacted laws under EU guidance, progress stalled due to a dispute in the Constitutional Tribunal, and Poland could not blame the system’s flaws alone.
Kaleta’s Questions on Twitter
Sebastian Kaleta responded to Czaputowicz’s remarks on social media, addressing the former diplomat directly.
To Jacek Czaputowicz,
The deputy minister challenged the former minister about the EU budget veto issue and the claim that the EU used blackmail, especially during a period when Poland’s stance on the conditionality mechanism was at stake.
When Poland faced questions about whether the EU could threaten funding, Kaleta pressed whether the truth was spoken back in July 2020, when the Foreign Ministry opposed vetoing the budget and the idea of blackmail.
He questioned why, if the view then was that Poland would be protected, the defense of sovereignty did not hold up at that time.
Kaleta also asked why Czaputowicz would adopt a German perspective on Poland’s judiciary reforms and whether the MFA defended Poland’s right to reform in relations with Germany. He argued that Poland’s reforms did not violate norms regarding politicization of the courts, and he suggested that the German criticism mirrored a German viewpoint rather than a Polish one. He implied that Germany has its own politicized courts and warned that presenting a German stance while serving as a Polish official could be seen as a misrepresentation. Kaleta concluded by noting a perceived inconsistency in positions and pointed to the possibility of a fifth column being involved.
The deputy minister’s message was carried by rp.pl, where Czaputowicz’s reply appeared later.
Kaleta published the note on Twitter, signaling a sharp exchange between former foreign policy leaders.
The exchange highlighted tensions within the security and sovereignty debate amid ongoing reform efforts and EU policy alignment.
The debate continued as Czaputowicz’s response opened with astonishment that Kaleta would question him, stressing that he has not steered Polish diplomacy for several years and should not be blamed for past foreign policy outcomes. He emphasized that during his tenure the ministry repeatedly defended Poland’s right to reform the judiciary.
He scrutinized the notion that the conditionality mechanism is a tool of blackmail by the EU, noting that by December 2020, four months after he left the role, the mechanism within the EU framework had already been set in motion.
He also addressed accusations of portraying Germany’s position on the judiciary, underscoring that the Sejm enacted the law to align Poland’s legal system with EU demands. He suggested that those who accuse him of acting as a fifth column should examine which deputies complied with Berlin and Brussels’ dictates in passing the reform. The discussion touched on the broader sovereignty question and the EU’s evolving powers at the expense of member states. Czaputowicz asserted that Poland did not surrender sovereignty, though he acknowledged that political intentions do not always translate into favorable outcomes.
He closed by reiterating the perspective that sovereign Poland should be the guiding principle, even as the political realities shaped the results, which he found unsatisfactory for national sovereignty.
– ends the reply to Kaleta’s letter.
(citation: wPolityce)
Closing Note
The sequence of statements and responses illustrates how public discourse on sovereignty, reform, and EU policy can become a proxy battle over national independence and governance authority.
(citation: wPolityce)