New accounts from TVN Fakty reporter Arleta Zalewska describe a turbulent scene in the Sejm. The talkative moment centered on Jarosław Kaczyński, the leader of PiS and Deputy Prime Minister, who reportedly tried to speak during the debate but was told to let others finish. The exchange left observers questioning what the House rules allow and whether the chafing clash reflects deeper tensions about procedure and authority.
Stormy Sejm session with ministers speaking in the background
That Tuesday evening saw the Sejm appoint members of the National Council of the Judiciary. The discussion grew heated as several PiS ministers pressed to address the chamber, including the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office and the EU Affairs minister. When the first minister spoke, the Sejm’s presiding officer urged a strict three minute window for remarks, consistent with club voting practices. The minister pressed the point that the floor should be granted to ministers in the order of speakers who request it, arguing that there is no time limit in the Sejm procedures for ministers on such matters.
A second participant, the minister in the Prime Minister’s Chancellery, also joined the debate. He noted that past leadership had not violated the rules in a way that would undermine the process and suggested that the current approach shows a rift between different eras of Sejm leadership.
One key passage cited calls attention to Article 186, which states that ministers can speak when they wish, a point the exchange repeatedly returned to. The Sejm’s chair warned that time was running short for some voices. MPs from PiS began to chant for adherence to the rules as the chair explained that the rules had been applied literally in this situation. Should the proceedings be disrupted again, the chair indicated he would use an order to restrict speaking and could adjourn the meeting. Eventually the minister present was asked to supplement his remarks, bringing the debate to a close for the moment.
The recap highlighted a moment when readers could relive the events through a video summary on TVN24. The unfolding sequence showed how the chair managed the room while ministers shared their perspectives, and how the session eventually moved toward a vote with the list of speakers closed.
What conversations did Kaczyński have with the marshal?
Footage circulated online that captured a brief exchange between PiS president Jarosław Kaczyński and the Sejm’s presiding officer during the Ziobro speech. The dialogue appeared short and Kaczyński returned to his seat after a quick moment at the dais. The public’s curiosity centered on what was said and whether the attempt to speak had been a request tied to his position as prime minister at that moment, or simply a perception held by some that he should be granted the right to speak.
According to Arleta Zalewska of Fakty, the real focus lay in how the exchange played out and what it signified for parliamentary norms. Some witnesses suggested Kaczyński asserted his prime ministerial rights, while others recalled the presiding officer’s assertion that ministers had already been given the floor. The reporting party noted that Kaczyński ultimately returned to his seat without pursuing an exceptional speaking turn. Szymon Hołownia later clarified that a long list of ministers had spoken before the decision to cap speeches was announced.
Paulina Hennig-Kloska, a Poland 2050 deputy, confirmed through a separate interview that the Prime Minister’s prerogatives were not the same as ministerial duties and that the rules were applied to manage the flow of the debate. This perspective underscored the tension between the symbolic authority of the office and the procedural framework that governs floor time in the chamber.
Supporters and critics alike weighed in. A Poland 2050 representative argued that the rules were interpreted strictly to maintain order, while PiS spokespeople stressed that ministers remain in office until a new government is formed, preserving continuity in governance. The clash prompted a broader discussion about how the Sejm should handle similar scenarios in the future.
Hołownia’s rationale and potential changes to the rules
The Sejm’s speaker offered his side on the matter, suggesting that the government must respect the conventions that allow ministers to express themselves when the floor is open to the Council of Ministers. He framed the situation as a test of how rule of law and parliamentary norms interact in practice. He argued that the Sejm should be a place where the government can speak when invited and that the current situation could prompt a review of the procedures to prevent intentional disruption.
The speaker added that he would consider presenting proposals to the Sejm Presidium to clarify the rules. He emphasized that the Sejm is the body that appoints the government and that its role includes supervising the government’s work. The goal, in his view, is to ensure that the proceedings run smoothly and that the rule book guides rather than hinders debate.
The discussion concluded with a reminder of Article 186, which specifies that floor time should be granted to ministers and other officials who are part of the government when they request it. The point was reinforced to emphasize that the institution must balance orderly procedure with inclusive debate. Observers noted how the debate reflected broader questions about accountability and procedural fairness in parliament. The story, as recounted by TVN Fakty’s coverage, remains a focal point for readers seeking to understand the limits and responsibilities of parliamentary power, and how leaders interpret those boundaries in moments of tension. [citation: TVN Fakty, Arleta Zalewska]
Source reporting from wPolityce and Wirtualna Polska provided context and additional quotes to illustrate how different actors view the sequence of events and the implications for the Sejm’s operating rules. The unfolding narrative underscores the ongoing conversation about how the Sejm should handle speaking rights and who may assert them during fast-moving sessions. [citation: wPolityce, Wirtualna Polska]