Forty point one percent of respondents express a positive view of the initial proposal to summon NBP President Adam Glapiński before the State Tribunal, while forty point four percent oppose it. This snapshot comes from a United Surveys poll conducted for Wirtualna Polska, aimed at gauging public sentiment on the government’s move and the political calculations behind it.
The ruling coalition has signaled its intention to bring the NBP president before the State Tribunal. In the survey, respondents were asked to assess the merit and potential political impact of this application, which was drafted to address claims or concerns surrounding the president’s conduct or actions in office.
According to the results, forty point one percent of participants see the application in a positive light. Within this group, sixteen point two percent described their stance as absolutely positive, while twenty three point nine percent labeled it fairly positive, suggesting a notable minority who view the move as warranted or constructive despite broader opposition.
Different point of view
Forty point four percent of respondents hold a contrary opinion. Among them, thirty percent evaluate the application as definitely negative, and ten point four percent as rather negative, indicating a sizable contingent of the public that questions either the necessity or the timing of summoning the NBP president to the State Tribunal. A smaller share, nineteen point five percent, stated that they could not form a clear assessment of the request, reflecting uncertainty or ambivalence about the procedural process and its potential consequences.
The survey also sheds light on how supporters of different political blocs view the Glapiński proposal. Within the Law and Justice camp, a striking ninety one percent expressed a negative view, with seventy seven percent explicitly opposing the move. Among Confederation supporters, sentiment leaned more favorable, with eighty six percent expressing a positive assessment. Supporters of the coalition partner KO, as well as the Third Way, showed mixed signals with a substantial portion of their voters casting a positive vote for the proposition. Meanwhile, among Left-wing voters, about half could not provide a definite assessment of the proposal, highlighting the diversity of opinion across the political spectrum and the challenge of achieving a unified stance on the issue.
The study conducted by United Surveys for Wirtualna Polska was carried out on March twenty second and twenty third, twenty twenty four, employing CATI and CAWI methods. The sample consisted of a representative cross-section of one thousand adult Poles, designed to reflect the broad variability of attitudes across age groups, regions, and party identifications. The results provide a snapshot of how the public perceives the interplay between monetary policy leadership and constitutional or parliamentary mechanisms in the current political climate.
In related coverage, the broader public discourse has included questions about the appropriateness of government oversight and executive accountability in cases involving high-level financial authorities. The ongoing dialogue underscores the tension between independent central banking and the oversight frameworks available to elected representatives. The figures cited above illustrate the spectrum of opinion and the ways in which different factions weigh the potential benefits and risks of such a constitutional intervention.
Overall, the poll highlights a polarized landscape where trust in institutions, perceptions of political motives, and readings of procedural legitimacy all play into whether the proposed action is viewed as necessary or overly aggressive. As the debate continues, these attitudes may influence future negotiations, strategic decisions by political leaders, and the public’s verdict on integrity, accountability, and the balance of powers in Poland’s governance system.