Disappointment and the Polish Parliamentary Elections


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


Even the winners of yesterday’s parliamentary elections in Poland can feel (at least somewhat) like losers. There are many possible scenarios for how events will unfold, and underlying tensions threaten to wreak havoc among the main parties. While there are many reasons for all parties to be satisfied, there are also many reasons why they may look to the upcoming Sejm with trepidation rather than excitement.

Leszek Koczanowicz*


The biggest surprise of yesterday’s elections is that there were no surprises. A sluggish election campaign made this an obvious possibility, where the thunderous pronouncements that these were the most important elections since 1989 were not accompanied by any new bold visions of how the country should development or society be transformed.


Everything thus turned out in line with the predictions of polls and expert opinions. But because few people today believe in opinion polls and expert opinions, the general attitude was one of waiting for a shock, for some change that would shake up the existing political order.


Of course, these expectations comprised in large part the wishful thinking of politicians and supporters of certain parties, but also the feeling that the current political arrangement in Poland has run its course, that a fresh start is necessary, whatever it may be. We already know today that these hopes have not come true. This is the first disappointment! The results of the elections mean that we remain in the same deadlock we have been stuck in for at least 14 years.


But at the moment, nothing would indicate that a mature two-party system has formed; the new Sejm will include both representatives of the left wing and free-market nationalists. It is a dynamic and developing situation.


Those who were counting on stabilization of the political situation in Poland may thus find themselves disappointed.


PiS deprived of the “liberals versus patriots” cudgel


Of course, politicians and supporters of certain parties have experienced a series of disappointments. The Law and Justice party (PiS) may have won decisively, but the spontaneous reaction of Jarosław Kaczyński that “we deserved more” is telling. Indeed, after four years of wielding full power in the country, numerous social transfers, vicious propaganda in the public media, brutal pressure in culture and education, the party has essentially duplicated its result from the previous elections in terms of the number of seats.


Its parliamentary majority in the lower chamber is secure, but there is a long way to go to a majority that would allow them to amend the constitution and override presidential vetoes.


Furthermore, the new structure of the Sejm puts Law and Justice in a much more difficult situation than it was before. On the one hand, it will lose its monopoly on social issues, as these will be advanced by the left, while on the other, it will have to outbid the far-right Confederation on issues of nationalism. The comfortable division into liberals and patriots, which allowed the PiS electorate to be mobilised without difficulty, will disappear.


PO no longer leading the opposition


Civic Platform (Platforma Obywatelska, PO) should also be disappointed, not only with its poor results, which were in line with expectations, but also with the fact that it seems to have lost the last of its chances to lead the opposition.


A bland election campaign, incomprehensible tactical moves, the lack of a clear programme or even slogans clearly demonstrate that the party, which retains considerable potential, is flying blind, and the only way for it to remain a significant force in politics is a radical makeover of both its programme and personnel. There is, however, little time for this, because presidential elections are just around the corner…


Other parties in murky waters


The other three parties, or rather coalitions of parties, have no cause for disappointment, but their situation exhibits ambiguities as well.


“The Left”, which is essentially a federation of three different “lefts”, is a clear winner in these elections. After a spectacular failure four years ago, significant internal bloodletting and reorganization, the left side of the political spectrum has returned to the Sejm. This is obviously a success in and of itself! However, the relatively strong result achieved by the left fails to live up to expectations, even when adding together the polling results of the particular parties that comprise it.


Moreover, the differences between the various parties within the coalition, which have been so far been papered over for the good of the election campaign, will surely come to light soon, and we will certainly witness a long and painful process of reinventing the unified left.


In political terms, the situation of the agrarian PSL – toutes proportions gardées – appears similar. This party, as usual, hid its lack of a programme with a skilful tactical manoeuvre, taking under its wing the remnants of the Kukiz protest party. This was a successful gambit, generating a result that exceeded expectations. The party pulled its neck out from the noose that it was put in by the expansion of PiS into the rural electorate. So PSL has something to be happy about, managing to retain and even enhance its position. Nevertheless, this party must also reinvent itself. A strange hybrid of the remnants of a rural electorate and populism, cobbled together for the purposes of the campaign, is unsustainable in the long run.


It is most difficult to write about the relative success of the extreme-right Confederation. All those who hold the good of the country and its image abroad in their hearts will be disappointed. What is certain is that the message will make its way around the world that for the first time since the Second World Wat, the extreme and fascist-leaning right has made it into the Sejm!


Again, however, we are dealing with a programmatically unsustainable monster: on the one hand, lovers of an extreme and simplified libertarianism, a maximally weak state, and on the other hand, extreme nationalists, supporters of a strong nation-state interfering in every sphere of its citizens’ lives. Whether the desire to exist in politics and the lust for power are enough for this party to survive will be seen during this parliamentary term.


A new political dynamic unleashed


All of this leads to the conclusion that the elections have triggered a dynamic that will lead to a complete change in the political scene. It will be a parliament of transformation rather than of continuation.


Of course, it is difficult to predict in detail a scenario that depends on so many unpredictable factors, in particular the general global economic situation, but the trends seem clear.


The first period of the new Sejm will see a brutal acceleration of the Law and Justice party’s efforts to completely overhaul the state and society completely.


This will inevitably be the case for two reasons. Firstly, the leadership of PiS believes that if such a change is not made now, then it may soon be too late. Secondly, the threat of an economic slowdown looming over us will force them to act quickly.


Forceful changes require the support of the public, which in turn requires the maintenance and expansion of social transfer programmes, which is only possible in a situation of relative economic growth. The first wave of the attack will certainly target local governments, which remain autonomous and independent, and thus constitute a serious obstacle to PiS achieving its objectives. The battle for control over regions will therefore certainly be the first attempt at a new political arrangement.


This will be coupled with increasing pressure in the sphere of culture, as cultural institutions are at present largely dependent on local governments. Of course, the subordination of the judiciary to state authority will continue.


In short, we will see the next steps of the construction of a solidary nation-state and illiberal democracy-as—referendum, with its characteristic blurring of the lines between the executive, legislative, and judicial powers.


However, in the new Sejm, PiS will be operating in a sort of a vice, with pressure from two sides that may trigger an internal dynamic of change within the party, as it will be forced to make clear ideological declarations that it previously avoided by hiding behind a comfortable division into liberals and patriots. The necessity of such declarations always leads to splits and divisions, which we will witness. Transformations within the party may take place, for example, in the context of debate on regulations restricting the right to terminate pregnancies or laws aimed at the so-called LGBT ideology, de facto attacking sexual education and sexual minorities.


On the other hand, the social wing of Law and Justice will be under pressure from the left, which can speak competently on issues PiS has previously monopolized. This will no longer be a matter of further social transfers, but of a more comprehensive change in the socio-economic system, which, of course, must worry many prominent PiS politicians and supporters. I thus believe that internal divisions may appear within the party in this area as well.


A similar dynamic will affect Civic Platform. Its unity is also threatened by the end of the comfortable division into liberals (modernisers) and patriots (conservatives). In Polish conditions, where liberals are not liberals and conservatives have nothing to do with respect for tradition, this political division has made it possible in many cases to conceal the complete lack of ideology within the main parties. This will now become more difficult, if not impossible.


Three possibilities


What, then, are the possible political scenarios for the incoming Sejm? In my view, there are three: two likely, and one practically impossible.


The first is largely dependent on the results of the upcoming presidential election. If the future president is not from the ruling party, he or she will be faced with intense pressure for changes, which will in consequence lead to an institutional crisis, and ultimately to early elections. This scenario can also come true in the event of the disintegration of the main political parties, particularly Law and Justice.


The second version assumes the next president will be favourably disposed to the ruling party, maintaining that party’s unity while simultaneously shepherding through its package of transformation of the state and society. In this case, we can predict a shifting of the flare points of conflict outside institutional frameworks, as the Sejm will cease to play the role of a forum for discussion over legislation. Particularly if the economic situation worsens, this can lead to a serious political crisis that comes to a head with early elections, or a greater concentration of authoritarian tendencies in the governing party and the crossing of even the most fundamental lines in a democracy.


The third, least likely option assumes that a certain consensus can be worked out, not so much as to the shape of reforms, but rather as to their limits. Such self-restraint on the part of the ruling party would allow it to avoid drastic political solutions.


*Leszek Koczanowicz – culturologist, political scientist, philosopher. Professor at SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities in Wrocław. An expert in the cultural contexts of politics, conceptions of democracy, and ethics of politics. His interests include philosophy of culture, contemporary culture, and art. Koczanowicz has carried out studies and lectured at numerous universities around the world, including Columbia University, UC Berkley, Buffalo University, and Oxford, as well as the Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies (HCAS). Author of many books, including Community and Emancipation. The Conflict over Post-conventional Society [Wspólnota i emancypacje. Spór o społeczeństwo postkonwencjonalne] (2005), Politics of Time. Dynamics of Identity in Post-Communist Poland (2008), Modern Anxiety. Essays on Democracy and Its Adversaries [Lęk nowoczesny. Eseje o demokracji i jej adwersarzach] (2011), Politics of Dialogue: Non-Consensual Democracy and Critical Community (2015), and Democracy, Dialogue, Memory: Expression and Affect beyond Consensus (with Idit Alphandary, 2019).


[translated by Matthew La Fontaine]


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



October 14, 2019


Supreme CourtDisciplinary ChamberConstitutional Tribunaldisciplinary proceedingsjudgesZbigniew ZiobroPolandCourt of Justice of the EUrule of lawEuropean CommissionNational Council of the Judiciaryjudicial independenceMałgorzata ManowskaAndrzej DudaEuropean UnionCourt of JusticeIgor Tuleyadisciplinary systemEuropean Court of Human RightsMateusz MorawieckiMinister of Justicemuzzle lawCommissioner for Human RightsCJEUJarosław KaczyńskiNational Recovery PlanWaldemar ŻurekPrzemysław RadzikKamil Zaradkiewiczdisciplinary commissionerPiotr Schabdemocracyneo-judgespresidential electionselectionsharassmentjudiciaryFirst President of the Supreme CourtAdam Bodnarpreliminary rulingsSupreme Administrative CourtK 3/21Hungarycriminal lawelections 2020National Council for JudiciaryMichał LasotaBeata MorawiecJulia PrzyłębskaprosecutorsŁukasz PiebiakDagmara Pawełczyk-WoickaEuropean Arrest WarrantMaciej NawackiPaweł JuszczyszynPrime MinisterPresidentmedia freedomProsecutor GeneralConstitutionCriminal ChamberRegional Court in KrakówCourt of Justice of the European UnionCOVID-19disciplinary liability for judgesWojciech HermelińskiMałgorzata GersdorfSejmMaciej Ferekelections 2023Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs ChamberEU budgetfreedom of expressionRecovery FundStanisław PiotrowiczMarek SafjanAleksander StepkowskiOSCEPresident of the Republic of PolandimmunityAnna DalkowskaNational Public ProsecutorCouncil of Europecriminal proceedingsLabour and Social Security Chamberfreedom of assemblycommission on Russian influenceStanisław Biernatconditionality mechanismconditionalityWłodzimierz WróbelLaw and JusticeprosecutionNCJMinistry of JusticeNational ProsecutorNational Electoral CommissionJarosław WyrembakAndrzej Zollacting first president of the Supreme CourtOrdo IurisK 7/21May 10 2020 electionsLex DudaNational Reconstruction PlanProfessional Liability ChamberPresident of PolandsuspensionLGBTXero Flor w Polsce Sp. z o.o. v. PolandBroda and Bojara v PolandReczkowicz and Others v. Polandparliamentmedia independenceIustitiaKrystian MarkiewiczJarosław DudziczSylwia Gregorczyk-AbramAmsterdam District CourtKrzysztof ParchimowiczMichał WawrykiewiczArticle 6 ECHRTHEMISEAWUrsula von der LeyenChamber of Professional LiabilityTVPmediaPiotr Prusinowski2017policeJustice Defence Committee – KOSFreedom HouseLech GarlickiEwa ŁętowskaSupreme Court PresidentArticle 7Venice CommissionPM Mateusz MorawieckiAndrzej StępkaPiotr GąciarekcorruptionP 7/20Justice FundPiSC-791/19Astradsson v IcelandK 6/21Piotr PszczółkowskiCivil ChamberJoanna Misztal-KoneckaPegasusMariusz KamińskisurveillanceCentral Anti-Corruption BureauGeneral Assembly of the Supreme Court Judgeslex NGOcivil societyRussiaJoanna Hetnarowicz-SikoraJarosław GowinLGBT ideology free zonesEdyta Barańskacriminal codeUkraineKonrad WytrykowskiJakub IwaniecSenateZuzanna Rudzińska-BluszczMarcin WarchołDariusz DrajewiczRafał Puchalskidefamationcourtssmear campaignFree CourtsmilestonesConstitutional Tribunal PresidentMarzanna Piekarska-DrążekEwa WrzosekEU law primacyelectoral processLex Super OmniaAdam TomczyńskiBelgiumNetherlandsWojciech MaczugaBogdan Święczkowskijudcial independenceMaciej Miterademocratic backslidingViktor OrbanOLAFdecommunizationNext Generation EUvetoabortionJózef IwulskiLaw on the NCJrecommendationTeresa Dębowska-RomanowskaKazimierz DziałochaMirosław GranatAdam JamrózStefan JaworskilexTuskBiruta Lewaszkiewicz-PetrykowskaWojciech ŁączkowskiHuman Rights CommissionerMarek MazurkiewiczCCBEAndrzej MączyńskiThe Council of Bars and Law Societies of EuropeJanusz NiemcewiczMałgorzata Pyziak- SzafnickaStanisław Rymarpublic opinion pollFerdynand RymarzAndrzej RzeplińskiJerzy StępieńPiotr TulejaSławomira Wronkowska-JaśkiewiczMirosław WyrzykowskireportBohdan ZdziennickiMarek ZubikDidier ReyndersEuropean ParliamentOKO.pressZiobroDariusz ZawistowskiMichał Laskowskiintimidation of dissentersMarek PietruszyńskitransferKrystyna PawłowiczMariusz MuszyńskiPiebiak gatehuman rightsEuropean Association of Judges11 January March in WarsawPaweł FilipekMaciej TaborowskiMarian BanaśSupreme Audit OfficeAdam SynakiewiczBelarusstate of emergencyKrakówcoronavirusXero Flor v. PolandEU treatiesAgnieszka Niklas-BibikSłupsk Regional CourtMaciej Rutkiewiczresolution of 23 January 2020Mirosław WróblewskiLeon Kieresright to protestSławomir JęksaPKWWiktor JoachimkowskiRoman Giertychinfringment actionEU valuesMichał WośMinistry of FinanceENCJJacek SasinErnest BejdaThe First President of the Supreme CourtMaciej CzajkaMariusz JałoszewskiIsraelŁukasz Radkeforeign agents lawpolexitDolińska-Ficek and Ozimek v PolandOrganization of Security and Co-operation in EuropeFirst President of the Suprme CourtPaulina Kieszkowska-KnapikMaria Ejchart-DuboisAgreement for the Rule of LawPorozumienie dla PraworządnościLGBT free zonesAct sanitising the judiciaryequalityMarek AstChamber of Extraordinary Verificationhate crimesCourt of Appeal in Krakówhate speechPutinismKaczyńskiGrzęda v Polandright to fair trialPaulina AslanowiczJarosław MatrasŻurek v PolandMałgorzata Wąsek-WiaderekSobczyńska and Others v Polandct on the Protection of the PopulatiolegislationRafał Trzaskowskilex Wośmedia lawRome StatuteInternational Criminal CourtPrzemysła RadzikAntykastaStanisław ZdunIrena BochniakKrystyna Morawa-FryźlewiczKatarzyna ChmuraElżbieta KarskaMarcin RomanowskiGrzegorz FurmankiewiczJacek CzaputowiczMarek JaskulskiPrzemysław CzarnekJoanna Kołodziej-Michałowiczlegislative practiceEwa ŁąpińskaZbigniew ŁupinaENAPaweł StyrnaZbigniew BoniekKasta/AntykastaAndrzej SkowronŁukasz BilińskiIvan MischenkoOmbudsmanMonika FrąckowiakArkadiusz CichockiKraśnikEmilia SzmydtNorwayTomasz SzmydtNorwegian fundsNorwegian Ministry of Foreign AffairsE-mail scandalDworczyk leaksMichał DworczykC-487/19media pluralism#RecoveryFilesArticle 10 ECHRRegional Court in Amsterdamrepairing the rule of lawOpenbaar MinisterieAK judgmentBohdan BieniekSimpson judgmentMarcin KrajewskiForum Współpracy SędziówMałgorzata Dobiecka-WoźniakChamber of Extraordinary Control and Public Affairspublic broadcasterWiesław KozielewiczNational Recovery Plan Monitoring CommitteeGrzegorz PudaPiotr MazurekJerzy Kwaśniewskimutual trustPetros Tovmasyancourt presidentsLMODIHRIrelandFull-Scale Election Observation MissionNGOIrena MajcherAmsterdamKarolina MiklaszewskaRafał LisakMałgorzata FroncJędrzej Dessoulavy-ŚliwińskiSebastian Mazurekthe Regional Court in WarsawElżbieta Jabłońska-MalikSzymon Szynkowski vel SękUnited NationsJoanna Scheuring-Wielgusinsulting religious feelingsLeszek Mazuroppositionelectoral codeAdam Gendźwiłłpopulisminterim measuresDariusz Dończykautocratizationtest of independenceMultiannual Financial FrameworkTomasz Koszewskipublic mediaJakub Kwiecińskiabortion rulingdiscriminationequal treatmentAct on the Supreme Courtprotestselectoral commissionsfundamental rightsthe NetherlandsEuropean Court of HuDenmarkKrzysztof RączkaSwedenPoznańFinlandKoan LenaertsMariusz KrasońKarol WeitzCT PresidentKaspryszyn v PolandGermanyNCR&DCelmerNCBiRC354/20 PPUThe National Centre for Research and DevelopmentC412/20 PPUEuropean Anti-Fraud Office OLAFAusl 301 AR 104/19Justyna WydrzyńskaKarlsruheAgnieszka Brygidyr-Doroszact on misdemeanoursJoanna KnobelCivil Service ActCrimes of espionageParliamentary Assembly of the Council of EuropeEUextraordinary commissionZbigniew KapińskiWhite PaperAnna GłowackalustrationCourt of Appeal in Warsawtransitional justiceOsiatyński'a ArchiveUS State Department2018Nations in TransitCouncil of the EUmedia taxStanisław Zabłockiadvertising taxmediabezwyboruJacek KurskiKESMAIndex.huTelex.huJelenJózsef SzájerKlubrádióSLAPPLIBE CommitteeStrategic Lawsuits Against Public ParticipationFrans TimmermansGazeta WyborczaUS Department of StatePollitykaBrussels IRome IISwieczkowskiArticle 2Forum shoppingadvocate generaltransparencyEuropean Economic and Social Committeepress releaseSebastian KaletaRights and Values ProgrammeC-156/21C-157/21C-619/18Marek Piertuszyńskidefamatory statementsWorld Justice Project awardNational Prosecutor’s OfficeWojciech SadurskiBogdan ŚwiączkowskiDisicplinary ChamberjudgeTribunal of StatePechOlsztyn courtKochenovPrzemysła CzarnekEvgeni TanchevEducation MinisterFreedom in the WorldECJIpsosFrackowiakOlimpia Barańska-Małuszeretirement ageAmnesty InternationalHudocKonrad SzymańskiPiotr Bogdanowicztrans-Atlantic valuesPiotr BurasLSOauthoritarian equilibriumlawyersArticle 258Act of 20 December 2019clientelismoligarchic systemEuropean Public Prosecutor's Officerepressive actPolish National FoundationLux VeritatisKoen LenaertsMałgorzata BednarekPiotr WawrzykharrassmentAlina CzubieniakTVNjournalistslexTVNGerard BirgfellerEwa MaciejewskaPolish mediapostal voteRzeszówborderpostal vote billprimacy