“Boorish rabble!”: Kaczyński insulted the opposition parties in the Sejm

Share

Everything you need to know about the rule of law in Poland

More

Kaczyński's outburst of 4 June 2020 has a political dimension and may be harmful to President Duda’s campaign



By Michał Danielewski

 

It was supposed to be a ritual debate on a vote of no confidence in the Minister of Health, Łukasz Szumowski. Ritual, because PiS has the majority so it can reject the motion. It was only voting that was left when the PiS chairman, Jarosław Kaczyński, started to insult the opposition MPs.

 

It seemed as if all the parliamentary emotions on 4 June 2020 were exhausted by the afternoon debate on the vote of confidence for Mateusz Morawiecki’s government. The motion for the vote suddenly submitted by the prime minister actually became an election rally for Andrzej Duda: the head of the government praised the president and rebuked the opposition from the rostrum, accusing it of “provoking”, “inciting” and “stirring”.

 

However, the head of Law and Justice, Jarosław Kaczyński, gave a new dose of emotions just before midnight, simultaneously correcting the prime minister’s words, deciding to present what “peace at the top”, which is PiS’ latest idea for Andrzej Duda’s election campaign, is supposed to be, based on his own example. Kaczyński called the opposition a “rabble”.

 

Opposition MP Barbara Nowacka (Koalicja Obywatelska – KO), clearly moved by Chairman Kaczyński’s words, responded. And she started: “I have heard about how the chairman is better several times, when he entered that cemetery which I couldn’t enter.” Nowacka’s mother MP Izabela Jaruga-Nowacka was one of the victims of  airplane crash in Smoleńsk in 2010. Then President of Poland Lech Kaczyński and his wife Maria were also among the victims.

 

Nowacka alluded to a much publicized visit of Jarosław Kaczyński to Powązki Cementery in Warsaw on the crash’s 10th anniversary on 10 April 2020, when cemeteries in Poland were closed due to COVID-19-motivated restrictions on public gatherings.

 

 

Nowacka: “I have the impression that Chairman Kaczyński called us a rabble”

 

The motion for the vote of no confidence against Szumowski was filed by the members of the Civic Coalition (Koalicja Obywatelska – KO). The allegations against the minister apply to unclear situations described by the media at the point where the ministry of health and a businessman acquainted with the minister meet (this applies to an order for protective masks work several million zlotys, which did not meet the safety standards), as well as multi-million zloty grants from the Scientific Centre for Research and Development (NCBiR) for the research company run by Szumowski’s brother, which were awarded to him, among others, at a time when Szumowski was the deputy minister of science to whom the NCBiR reports.

 

Speaking in his own defence, Szumowski stated that the opposition is taking advantage of media that is producing fake news about him. He mentioned four media: TVN, Wyborcza, Newsweek and OKO.press.

 

KO’s motion was being justified by MP Barbara Nowacka. When she started to speak, the head of the Civic Platform (Platforma Obywatelska – PO) party, Borys Budka, drew the attention of the Deputy Speaker of the Sejm, Ryszard Terlecki, to the behaviour of the PiS deputies: Nowacka was speaking, while Jarosław Kaczyński and the deputy prime minister and the minister of culture, Piotr Gliński, were standing with their backs towards her and were talking in the government benches. When Terlecki did not react, Budka went up to the podium and called on Kaczyński and Gliński to sit down and listen. “This is not your own property, Mr. Chairman,” he called out while he was returning to his seat.

 

Gliński aggressively replied to Budka that the vote of no confidence was “pure audacity and scandalous.” Terlecki did not react, he focused all his attention on Budka, ordering him to take his seat.

 

Confusion arose in the parliamentary room. However, the tension was already subsiding when Jarosław Kaczyński shouted to the opposition deputies from behind the government benches:

 

“There has never been such a boorish rabble in this Sejm!”

 

Gliński tried to cover up or even stop Kaczyński, but the words reached the opposition MPs. Voices were raised: “What is this supposed to be?” “He should apologise.” Terlecki did not react. He was still only addressing the opposition MPs.

 

“Please stop causing a row and sit still” – repeated Terlecki.

 

“Mr. Speaker, I have the impression that MP Kaczyński just called us a rabble”, said Nowacka sententially.

 

Nowacka: How dare he insult me

 

Deputy Marshal Terlecki ordered a five-minute break. When the session resumed, Barbara Nowacka again entered the podium, still clearly moved by Kaczyński’s words. However, she demonstrated a political reflection by positioning Kaczyński’s outburst of contempt in a broader context:

 

“Mr. Speaker, I have heard about how the chairman is better several times, when he entered that cemetery which I couldn’t enter because then his pain was greater than mine.”

 

At the same cemetery where my mother, a victim of the Smolensk disaster, is buried. But he went in, laid flowers for his mother and his brother, while others could not. And now, today, he dares to insult me!

 

We can see, once again, what PiS is. A new solidarity is developing among the people, those who supported the sick, those who sewed masks, and PiS once again showed us its cash cow change.

 

The arrogance we saw here in the hall, corruption, nepotism, these are your names, the new elite from PiS!”

 

At this point, Terlecki switched off Nowacka’s microphone.

 

Kaczyński’s relapse

 

This is not the first time that Jarosław Kaczyński was abusive to the opposition.

 

A similar episode took place on 18 July 2017 at 23:47, at a time when tens of thousands of Poles were protesting in the streets against the authority’s attack on the Supreme Court. The PiS leader shouted 30 words from the parliamentary rostrum.

 

“I’m sorry, Mr. Speaker, this is without a procedure. I know you’re afraid of the truth, but don’t wipe your treacherous mugs with the memory of my brother. You destroyed him, you murdered him, you are scoundrels.”

 

Jarosław Kaczyński also once attacked Agnieszka Pomaska from the PO party. During the blockade of the parliamentary rostrum by the opposition on 16 December 2016, he shouted to her “Go to hell”, and several hours later, he took her mobile phone and threw it on the ground.

 

This may hurt Duda

 

Kaczyński’s outburst of 4 June 2020 has a political dimension and may be harmful to President Duda’s campaign.

 

In the light of the weakening support for Andrzej Duda, the Law and Justice party has placed all its money on one horse, building the image of the head of state as a guarantor of “peace at the top” and of silencing political emotions. PiS’ slogan says that, after Duda’s re-election, there will be harmony and, instead of arguing, the politicians will work for the good of the Poles.

 

Kaczyński’s insults of the opposition are destroying this image, because they are proving, black on white, that the leader of the camp in power has a contemptuous attitude towards the opposition – and that part of the public that objects to PiS rule. According to the PiS chairman’s idea, “peace at the top” will only be possible if the opposition does not oppose the right-wing populists ruling in Poland. In other words, when it stops being an opposition.



Author


Everything you need to know about the rule of law in Poland


More

Published

June 8, 2020

Tags

Supreme CourtPolandConstitutional TribunalDisciplinary Chamberjudgesrule of lawdisciplinary proceedingsZbigniew ZiobroNational Council of the Judiciaryjudicial independenceCourt of Justice of the EUEuropean CommissionEuropean UnionAndrzej DudaMałgorzata ManowskaCourt of JusticeMinister of JusticeEuropean Court of Human RightsAdam BodnarIgor Tuleyadisciplinary systemneo-judgesmuzzle lawCJEUJarosław KaczyńskiNational Recovery PlanMateusz MorawieckiCommissioner for Human RightsWaldemar ŻurekCourt of Justice of the European UnionNational Council for JudiciaryPrzemysław RadzikdemocracyPiotr Schabjudiciarypresidential electionselectionscriminal lawKamil Zaradkiewiczelections 2023disciplinary commissionermedia freedomJulia PrzyłębskaK 3/21First President of the Supreme Courtelections 2020harassmentSupreme Administrative Courtpreliminary rulingsDagmara Pawełczyk-WoickaprosecutionHungaryMichał LasotaprosecutorsBeata MorawiecRecovery FundPresidentProsecutor GeneralPaweł JuszczyszynNational ProsecutorŁukasz PiebiakConstitutionEuropean Arrest WarrantPrime Ministerfreedom of expressionMaciej NawackiCOVID-19Marek SafjanVenice CommissionSejmimmunityCriminal ChamberRegional Court in KrakówIustitiaMaciej FerekMałgorzata GersdorfreformMinistry of JusticeNCJExtraordinary Control and Public Affairs ChamberOSCEcourtsWojciech Hermelińskidisciplinary liability for judgesEU budgetcorruptionStanisław PiotrowiczNational Public Prosecutorcriminal proceedingsCouncil of EuropeAnna DalkowskaLGBTJustice FundPresident of the Republic of PolandWłodzimierz Wróbelconditionality mechanismTHEMISKrystian MarkiewiczAleksander StepkowskiStanisław BiernatPiSreformsLaw and Justicecommission on Russian influenceLabour and Social Security ChamberJarosław Dudziczconditionalityfreedom of assemblyPresident of PolandChamber of Professional LiabilityOrdo Iurismedia independenceDidier ReyndersReczkowicz and Others v. PolandSLAPPStrategic Lawsuits Against Public ParticipationBroda and Bojara v PolandXero Flor w Polsce Sp. z o.o. v. PolandChamber of Extraordinary Control and Public AffairsSupreme Court PresidentMarcin Romanowskielectoral codeAndrzej StępkaArticle 7Piotr PrusinowskiSenateSylwia Gregorczyk-AbramParliamentary Assembly of the Council of EuropeTVPmediaLech GarlickiLex Super OmniapoliceabortionNext Generation EUUrsula von der LeyenEAWJustice Defence Committee – KOSAmsterdam District CourtdefamationKrzysztof ParchimowiczFreedom HouseMichał WawrykiewiczEwa ŁętowskaArticle 6 ECHRMay 10 2020 elections2017Piotr GąciarekPegasussuspensionP 7/20acting first president of the Supreme CourtNational Electoral CommissionK 7/21PM Mateusz MorawieckiAndrzej ZollJarosław WyrembakLex DudaProfessional Liability ChamberCivil Chamberparliamentcivil societyNational Reconstruction PlanConstitutional Tribunal PresidentAdam JamrózStefan JaworskiJoanna Hetnarowicz-SikoraKrakówBiruta Lewaszkiewicz-PetrykowskaStanisław RymarMałgorzata Pyziak- SzafnickaJanusz NiemcewiczAndrzej MączyńskiMarek MazurkiewiczAdam Synakiewiczstate of emergencyWojciech ŁączkowskiEdyta BarańskaMirosław GranatKazimierz DziałochaJoanna Misztal-Koneckajudcial independenceMaciej MiteraDariusz KornelukViktor OrbanOLAFrestoration of the rule of lawvetoMariusz KamińskisurveillanceK 6/21Józef IwulskiAstradsson v IcelandCentral Anti-Corruption BureauPATFoxSLAPPsTeresa Dębowska-RomanowskaaccountabilityUkraineKrystyna PawłowiczRafał PuchalskitransparencyDariusz ZawistowskiOKO.pressright to fair trialDariusz DrajewiczPaweł FilipekMaciej Taborowskismear campaigninsulting religious feelingsNational Prosecutor’s OfficeMariusz MuszyńskiBelaruselectoral processcourt presidentsMarzanna Piekarska-DrążekmilestonesWojciech MaczugaMichał LaskowskiMarian BanaśJakub IwaniecSławomira Wronkowska-JaśkiewiczPiotr TulejaJerzy Stępieńelections fairnessAndrzej RzeplińskiSzymon Szynkowski vel SękFerdynand RymarzInternational Criminal CourtMarek PietruszyńskiMirosław WyrzykowskiBohdan ZdziennickiXero Flor v. Polandpublic mediaSupreme Audit OfficelexTuskcourt changeselections integrityMarek ZubikKonrad Wytrykowskiabuse of state resourcesGeneral Assembly of the Supreme Court JudgesEuropean ParliamentZuzanna Rudzińska-BluszczMarcin Warchoł11 January March in WarsawEuropean Association of JudgesZiobroFree CourtsdecommunizationEwa WrzosekEU law primacyhuman rightsPiebiak gaterecommendationreportLaw on the NCJlex NGORussiaCCBEpublic opinion pollHuman Rights CommissionerJarosław GowinPiotr PszczółkowskiLGBT ideology free zonesC-791/19coronaviruscriminal coderetirement ageNetherlandsAdam Tomczyńskidemocratic backslidingintimidation of dissentersThe Council of Bars and Law Societies of EuropeBogdan ŚwięczkowskitransferBelgiumJoanna Scheuring-WielgusNations in TransitCouncil of the EUElżbieta Jabłońska-MalikKatarzyna ChmuraSebastian MazurekJędrzej Dessoulavy-ŚliwińskiLIBE Committeedefamatory statementsMałgorzata FroncRafał LisakKarolina MiklaszewskaNGOKrystyna Morawa-FryźlewiczIrena BochniakoppositionEuropean Court of Huelectoral commissionsAct on the Supreme CourtdiscriminationJakub KwiecińskiWorld Justice Project awardTomasz Koszewskitest of independenceDariusz DończykGrzegorz FurmankiewiczAntykastaStanisław ZdunAdam Gendźwiłł2018Wojciech SadurskiFull-Scale Election Observation MissionODIHRMarek Jaskulskirepairing the rule of lawadvocate generalpress release#RecoveryFilesmedia pluralismMichał DworczykDworczyk leaksE-mail scandalAndrzej SkowronRights and Values ProgrammeTomasz SzmydtŁukasz BilińskiIvan MischenkoMonika FrąckowiakEmilia SzmydtSwieczkowskiKasta/AntykastaBohdan BieniekStanisław ZabłockiJoanna Kołodziej-MichałowiczPetros TovmasyanJerzy KwaśniewskiPiotr MazurekGrzegorz PudaNational Recovery Plan Monitoring CommitteeWiesław KozielewiczFrans TimmermansMałgorzata Dobiecka-WoźniakUS Department of StateMarcin KrajewskiEwa ŁąpińskaZbigniew ŁupinaPaweł StyrnaC-619/18Arkadiusz CichockiCT PresidentMarcin Matczakequal treatmentNational School of Judiciary and Public Prosecution (KSSiP)codification commissiondelegationsWatchdog PolskaDariusz BarskiLasotafundamental rightsState Tribunalinsultcivil lawRadosław BaszukAction PlanJustice MinistryVěra JourováDonald Tuskjustice system reformAnti-SLAPP DirectiveHater ScandalpopulismNational Council for the Judiciarycivil partnerships billKRSJudicial Reformsmigration strategyPenal CodeLGBTQ+NIKProfetosame-sex unionsKatarzyna Kotulacivil partnershipsHelsinki Foundation for Human RightsPiotr HofmańskiC‑718/21preliminary referenceEU lawethicsChamber of Professional ResponsibilityThe Codification Committee of Civil LawInvestigationPoznańKrzysztof Rączkaextraordinary commissionZbigniew KapińskiAnna GłowackaCourt of Appeal in WarsawOsiatyński'a Archivetransitional justiceUS State DepartmentAssessment ActCrimes of espionageJoanna KnobelAgnieszka Brygidyr-DoroszKoan LenaertsKarol WeitzKaspryszyn v PolandNCR&DNCBiRThe National Centre for Research and DevelopmentEuropean Anti-Fraud Office OLAFJustyna Wydrzyńskaenvironmentinvestmentstrategic investmentRafał WojciechowskiAleksandra RutkowskaGeneral Court of the EUArkadiusz RadwanLech WałęsaWałęsa v. Polandright to an independent and impartial tribunal established by lawpilot-judgmentDobrochna Bach-Goleckaelection fairnessNational Broadcasting Councilgag lawsuitslex RaczkowskiPiotr Raczkowskithe Spy ActdisinformationlustrationWhite PaperEUDonald Tusk governmentjudgePrzemysław CzarnekJózsef SzájerRafał TrzaskowskiKlubrádióSobczyńska and Others v PolandŻurek v PolandGazeta WyborczaGrzęda v PolandPollitykaJelenmedia lawIndex.huJacek CzaputowiczElżbieta KarskaPrzemysła Radzikmedia taxadvertising taxmediabezwyboruJacek KurskiKESMABrussels IRome IILGBT free zonesFirst President of the Suprme CourtBogdan ŚwiączkowskiDisicplinary ChamberTribunal of StateOrganization of Security and Co-operation in EuropeOlsztyn courtPrzemysła CzarnekequalityMarek PiertuszyńskiChamber of Extraordinary VerificationArticle 2Forum shoppinghate speechEuropean Economic and Social CommitteeSebastian Kaletahate crimesC-156/21C-157/21Education Ministerthe Regional Court in Warsawproteststhe NetherlandsDenmarkSwedenFinlandMariusz KrasońGermanyCelmermutual trustabortion rulingLMUnited NationsLeszek MazurAmsterdamIrena Majcherinterim measuresIrelandautocratizationMultiannual Financial FrameworkC354/20 PPUC412/20 PPUC-487/19Norwegian Ministry of Foreign AffairsNorwegian fundsNorwayKraśnikOmbudsmanZbigniew BoniekENAArticle 10 ECHRRegional Court in AmsterdamOpenbaar MinisterieAusl 301 AR 104/19Karlsruheact on misdemeanoursCivil Service Actpublic broadcasterForum Współpracy SędziówSimpson judgmentAK judgmentlegislative practiceforeign agents lawrepressive actMaciej CzajkaMariusz JałoszewskiŁukasz RadkepolexitLSOtrans-Atlantic valuesDolińska-Ficek and Ozimek v PolandAmnesty InternationalThe First President of the Supreme CourtErnest BejdaJacek Sasinright to protestSławomir JęksaWiktor JoachimkowskiRoman GiertychAct of 20 December 2019Michał WośMinistry of FinancelawyersFrackowiakPaulina Kieszkowska-KnapikKochenovPaulina AslanowiczJarosław MatrasMałgorzata Wąsek-Wiaderekct on the Protection of the PopulatioPechlegislationlex WośKaczyńskiPutinismCourt of Appeal in KrakówMaria Ejchart-DuboisAgreement for the Rule of LawPorozumienie dla PraworządnościAct sanitising the judiciaryECJMarek AstFreedom in the WorldEvgeni TanchevRome StatuteIsraelEuropean Public Prosecutor's OfficeEU valuesPolish National FoundationLux Veritatisinfringment actionMałgorzata BednarekPiotr WawrzykPKWENCJoligarchic systemclientelismIpsosOlimpia Barańska-MałuszeHudocKonrad SzymańskiPiotr BogdanowiczPiotr Burasauthoritarian equilibriumArticle 258Leon Kieresresolution of 23 January 2020Telex.huEU treatiesAgnieszka Niklas-BibikSłupsk Regional CourtAlina CzubieniakMaciej RutkiewiczharrassmentMirosław WróblewskiprimacyborderGerard BirgfellerTVNjournalistslexTVNpostal vote billPolish mediapostal voteEwa MaciejewskaRzeszówKoen Lenaerts