The political initiative known as the Tour de Constitution has revealed its true colors. It was pitched as a democratic lesson for citizens, yet it appears to undermine the cherished right of every Pole to shape democracy. In Kielce, the session organized by the prosecutorial figure Ewa Wrzosek included a so‑called guide for referendum participants that aimed to cast doubt on the vote itself.
READ ALSO: ONLY WITH US. Hermeliński’s startling guide on how to derail the referendum: ‘It could be unconstitutional’
Meetings held on the trams under the banner of Tour de Konstytucja were marketed as apolitical gatherings. A few remarks from the well‑known actor and political activist Andrzej Chyra left little doubt about who backed this so‑called apolitical project.
There was a clear objective: secure a convincing win to influence post‑election dynamics, possibly by achieving a majority sufficient to override a presidential veto. Confidence became a focal point, and the group wandered through a tense atmosphere, recognizing time remained, while urging a strong victory.
– remarks attributed to Andrzej Chyra, who was greeted by applause that included Ewa Wrzosek and several onlookers.
Attack on the referendum
At Kielce, a central theme of the gathering was the rejection of the referendum idea, the notion of direct democracy. Yet the event, bearing the word “constitution” in its title, touched on questions about Poland’s future and the country’s most pressing issues for public discussion.
Observers note that many view the referendum as a bypass or manipulation by those in power, intended to boost turnout or to serve several strategic purposes. The announcement as it stood appeared to challenge constitutional provisions governing referendums on major national issues.
– commentary attributed to Ewa Wrzosek.
A guide for the “apolitical” prosecutor
The so‑called “apolitical” prosecutor presented a handbook that could be used to invalidate the referendum process.
If a participant chooses not to take part in the referendum, on the grounds that it is a fundamental right rather than an obligation, the guidance suggested that the person refrain from taking the referendum card and ensure that any nonparticipation is properly recorded. The document advised careful handling of the cards, including warnings that one might remove a card or tear it, although it cautioned against destroying documents. The guidance emphasized adherence to legal norms and the preservation of documents.
– remarks attributed to Ewa Wrzosek.
The concerns voiced here pointed to a perception that the legislature was creating an unfair scenario. There were implications raised for the Electoral Secrecy Act, with the suggestion that in a small town someone who did not participate could face public stigma or sanction.
– remarks attributed to a prosecutor from Warsaw.
The statements made during the Tour de Konstytucja reflect a troubling pattern at this political event. Beyond the immediate rhetoric, the concern centered on the perceived attack on direct democracy and on Poland’s constitutional right to express opinion. Calls for disciplinary action against the proponent of the handbook were voiced by many observers and critics.
In this context, the episode raises questions about the boundaries between political advocacy, constitutional rights, and the integrity of democratic processes. The events in Kielce illustrate a broader debate about how citizens should engage with constitutional issues and how authorities should interpret participation in national decision‑making processes.
The gathering, in its loudest moments, underscored the tension between different visions for Poland’s political future and the responsibility of public figures to model lawful and fair conduct when discussing fundamental rights.
Overall, the episode serves as a reminder that public discourse around reform and constitutional questions must be approached with care, clarity, and a commitment to democratic norms that protect the rights and voices of all citizens.