PiS Pushing Elections During Epidemic. Special Law on Postal Vote Debated in Sejm

Share

Journalist covering law and politics for OKO.press. Previously journalist at Gazeta Wyborcza, Rzeczpospolita, Polska The Times, Dziennik Gazeta Prawna.

More

Jarosław Kaczyński wants to organize the presidential elections in Poland in May at all costs. Law and Justice deputies have just submitted a bill to allow all Poles to vote by post. If local governments refuse to cooperate, will the army and the police help to organize elections?



On the 31th of March a group of Law and Justice (PiS) MPs submitted a special bill regulating the organization of the presidential elections in May. The bill is accessible on the Sejm’s website.  The bill is expected to be voted in Sejm on Friday, April 3rd. The voting agenda hasn’t been announced yet as this article is published.

 

The draft legislation is shocking, considering that the organization of elections, including presidential, is already regulated by the current provisions of the Electoral Code. Governing Law and Justice wants to pass a special law to cover only the May presidential elections.

 

Law and Justice seeking elections at all costs during an epidemic

 

Law and Justice party no longer conceals that elections are to be held even in the midst of the raging coronavirus epidemic. The first article of this draft bill says: “The Act establishes special rules for conducting postal voting in elections for the President of the Republic of Poland ordered in 2020, in connection with the epidemic declared within the territory of the Republic of Poland.”

 

PiS is pushing for these elections because, at the moment, everything favours Andrzej Duda, who is fighting for re-election. Incumbent Duda benefits from free TV time through speeches to the nation. The opposition candidates are not conducting their campaigns because of the epidemic, while Duda is traveling around Poland showing himself as a “good leader.”

 

PiS is also acutely aware that an economic crisis will certainly hit after the epidemic, and all the ills connected with it will weaken the poll numbers of Law and Justice before the May elections.

 

According to the draft bill submitted by PiS deputies in the Sejm, the organization of elections during the epidemic is to be aided by giving all citizens the right to postal vote.

 

Law and Justice has already extended this right to seniors over the age of 60 as well as to people subjected to quarantine in legislation adopted through votes from both PiS and PO at night on 28th of March.

 

Now PiS wants to give the right to postal voting to all voters, including those living abroad. Only voters casting their votes through a proxy and voting in what are known as closed electoral districts in hospitals, on ships, in penitentiaries, in social welfare homes, or in dormitories will not be able to vote in this way.

PiS to hold elections without local governments?

The rules for general postal voting will be announced in regulations and resolutions. The Ministry of State Assets – headed by Jacek Sasin – will specify in the regulation such issues as the mode of collecting return envelopes from voters and their delivery to local electoral commissions.

 

In turn, the State Election Commission (SEC) will define by resolution the mode of handling envelopes with votes at electoral commissions.

 

Abroad, the role of election commissioner will be performed by consuls. The details of correspondence voting abroad, the rules for transferring voting packets, their receipt, the manner of their storage and transfer to commissions will be determined by a regulation of the Minister of Foreign Affairs.

 

Of significance is Article 7 of the draft bill by PiS deputies, which states that “In the elections for the President of the Republic of Poland ordered in 2020, the State Election Commission may determine other conditions for the establishment of an electoral district than those set out in Article 182 and Article 183 of the Electoral Code of 5 January 2011.” Articles 182 and 183 of the Electoral Code regulate the principles of establishing election commissions.

 

So what is the point of Article 7, which allows the establishment of election commissions in a manner that departs from existing law? Is this the way Law and Justice wants to overcome the resistance of local governments which say that they will not participate in organizing elections during the epidemic?

 

Local governments mainly prepare polling stations in schools, kindergartens or community centres. They also collect applications from candidates to work in electoral commissions.

 

Will Article 7 and another provision passed along with legislation to ameliorate the economic crisis allow PiS to transfer the organization of election commissions and elections to other institutions under its own control? Will Law and Justice use the police, the army and the Territorial Defence Forces to organise elections when local governments refuse to do so and nobody is willing to work in election commissions?

 

Hermeliński: at the moment, there’s no danger of the army organizing elections

Wojciech Hermeliński, former Constitutional Tribunal judge and former Chairman of the State Electoral Commission comments:

 

“I am concerned about this article 7. I don’t know what’s behind it. But it cannot derogate the statutory conditions for appointing election commissions [this is regulated by the Electoral Code – ed.]. Candidates for a commission must, for example, live in the province where the commission is located,” says Hermeliński in interview for OKO.press.

 

In his opinion, Article 7 allows only the State Electoral Commission to define the technical conditions for establishing electoral commissions, as the State Electoral Commission cannot amend the election code by resolution.

 

The question thus arises: what conditions can the SEC change? For example, the SEC has already specified that candidates for these commissions may submit their candidacies electronically as a result of the epidemic. “This Article 7 does not allow the military to be involved in election commissions. There would have to be a clear provision allowing for such a possibility,” stresses Hermeliński.

 

The former head of the SEC notes that as in the previous week, the current proposals for changes in election law proposed by PiS violate the existing rules. According to the Constitutional Tribunal’s jurisprudence, significant changes in election law can be passed not later than six months before elections. “And there are significant changes in this draft, as it introduces postal voting for all voters,” remarks Hermeliński.

 

Moreover, the current draft changes in election law – as they were last week – have been introduced without warning in the Sejm. And according to Rule 89(2) of the Sejm’s Rules of Procedure, the first reading of draft amendments to a Code or draft amendments to the provisions introducing a Code may not take place earlier than fourteen days after the delivery of the draft to deputies.

 

The entire draft bill is available here.

 

Dispute in the ruling camp

 

It is not clear when the Sejm will take up this Law and Justice draft bill. It may do so at night on Friday, March 3rd.

 

However, there is a dispute brewing over these changes within the ruling coalition. Jarosław Gowin, Minister of Science and Higher Education and leader of Porozumienie (Alliance), who controls 18 seats in Sejm, does not like the new draft law.

 

“Gazeta Wyborcza” has reported that Gowin is threatening to leave the government if the changes are passed. Meanwhile, Jarosław Kaczyński is being supported by Zbigniew Ziobro.

 

It is also not clear known why PiS is forcing through a special law on presidential elections right now. After all, the Senate may block this bill by holding it for 30 days. That would mean Law and Justice will no longer be able to pass it in the Sejm and introduce postal voting before the elections on 10 May.

 

It cannot be ruled out, however, that PiS plans to provoke a conflict with the opposition if they seek to block the project in the Senate.

 

A message to the nation was delivered by the Speaker of the Sejm, Elizabeth Witek, from PiS. In it, she praised the notion of postal voting.

 

“It is currently being introduced in many places in the world where elections are bring held despite the pandemic. A draft bill with appropriate regulations on this matter is already in the Sejm. However, in order to successfully introduce these changes, we have little time and smooth cooperation between the Sejm, Senate and President is necessary. As the Speaker of the Sejm, I assure you of my readiness to proceed quickly, efficiently and collegially with the bill. I would also like to appeal to the Speaker of the Senate for the Upper House to take this task seriously and responsibly. I ask for the bill to be proceeded on efficiently in the Senate, because there will literally be only a few days after its adoption in the Sejm for the President to sign these changes into law and for them to take effect,” said the Speaker of the Sejm. And she sent a warning to the opposition, which enjoys a majority in the Senate: “It is a constitutional tort to postpone an election against the constitutional order just because someone perceives political gain in doing so. You can’t do that. The continuity of maintaining the institutional order of the state in such a crisis as the one facing us today should guide us all, regardless of political affiliations and views.”

 

The Speaker of the Sejm also said in her speech that PiS has no plans to introduce a state of emergency, which would automatically lead to the cancellation of elections.

 

Translated by Matthew La Fontaine



Author


Journalist covering law and politics for OKO.press. Previously journalist at Gazeta Wyborcza, Rzeczpospolita, Polska The Times, Dziennik Gazeta Prawna.


More

Published

April 3, 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