Zbigniew Rau, former head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, spoke on the program Gość Wiadomości wPolsce24 about the decision by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe to lift the immunity of Marcin Romanowski. He framed the issue within the broader context of how European bodies monitor the rule of law in member states and how due process is observed when immunity is at stake. Rau stressed the necessity of careful, fact based handling of such investigations, noting that brisk, emotionally charged moves can blur the line between accountability and political theater and may affect public confidence in both national and regional institutions.
The question many observers raised was why European Union institutions have not acted on what some view as breaches of Polish law and what appears to be a disregard for Supreme Court rulings. Rau suggested that silence from Brussels reflects deeper political alignments rather than a neutral, technocratic approach to enforcement, a perspective that ties the progress of cases to the broader dynamics of cooperation and disagreement within the European political landscape.
On the question of EU inaction Rau offered a succinct explanation. He argued that the answer lies in an ideological affinity between Poland’s present government and the European Union’s political establishment. In his view, a shared political project emerged after the United Right coalition lost its last election, shaping how each side interprets legality and reform and influencing assessments of what counts as legitimate reform, rule of law, and political accountability.
Rau linked this approach to what has been described in Polish political discourse as militant democracy. He argued that the policy framework suggested by Donald Tusk in the Senate aims to override outdated legal norms when they conflict with a declared revolutionary agenda, thereby altering how law is interpreted in practice and raising questions about the durability of existing checks and balances when political necessities are invoked as justification.
The decision to review Marcin Romanowski’s immunity, Rau stated, was political in character. He focused on the need to prepare thoroughly so that the facts attributed to the official could be established beyond reasonable doubt. He noted that the proceedings moved with unusual speed, to the point where participation and the examination of all relevant material truth were constrained, potentially affecting the thoroughness of the investigation and the public perception of fairness.
Rau admitted that the impression is hard to ignore, especially to observers within the European Union. He suggested that the sense of a political calculation behind the immunity revocation could have broader implications for how EU member states cooperate on judicial matters. He publicly questioned whether the decision might have been taken before the proceedings began and before a full, transparent evidentiary process could unfold, underscoring concerns about process integrity and accountability in high profile political cases.