PiS’s new bill. Protection of the people or protection of the authorities?


was the director of the Government Security Centre (2008–09) and Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs (1999–2001 and 2008–09).


The Act on the Protection of the Population, the draft of which ‘Gazeta Wyborcza’ obtained, gives the authorities the ability to restrict constitutional freedoms without the Sejm’s control and to remove uncomfortable mayors.

Hardly anyone noticed that, by adopting the Act ‘on the defence of the Homeland’ and repealing the previous Act on the general defence obligation in an atmosphere of elation and moral blackmail, the Polish parliament abolished the legal basis for the functioning of civil defence, namely the protection of the population in Poland. Clearly, this was not a mistaken omission on the part of PiS, but a preliminary step towards adopting another regulation, which is almost certainly to be enacted in the procedure of patriotic intensification in the face of war.


The bill on the protection of the population and the state of natural disasters which is being proposed by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Administration not only liquidates or demolishes the crisis management and critical infrastructure protection system in Poland, which is based on local authorities, and eliminates the Government Security Centre, but, worse still, it also poses a serious threat to democracy and self-governance.


The objective of the proposed Act is to permanently introduce extraordinary powers of the government over local authorities, businesses and citizens into Polish law, together with the possibility of the uniformed services applying discretionary repression introduced by the so-called ‘Special Covid Act’ and the state of emergency in the border zone. The new bill goes even further, because it creates a ‘fast track’ for removing inconvenient heads of counties and mayors.


New states of emergency without the Sejm’s control 


The bill being prepared by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Administration, which ‘Wyborcza’ obtained, introduces two new quasi states of emergency – alert and threat – referred to as ‘states of increased readiness’. They are to give the government certain powers arising from the classic states of emergency, but, unlike them, they do not require the consent of the president or parliament.


It will be possible to introduce a state of alert by a regulation of the minister of internal affairs or even a voivod for a period of up to 30 days in a situation where ‘because of adverse circumstances caused by the forces of nature or human activity, a need arises to increase the readiness of the public authorities. The state of alert may be extended after obtaining the consent of either the minister or the prime minister.’ The state of alert will apply to all bodies of central and local government administration operating within the voivodship, as well as all businesses.


The second state of increased readiness, which has far more serious consequences for democracy and self-governance, is to be a state of threat, which ‘is introduced by a regulation of the Prime Minister in the event that the introduction of the state of alert is insufficient and additional measures need to be taken by the bodies of public administration and appropriate restrictions, prohibitions and orders need to be introduced which are binding on individuals and entities protecting the population’. It will be possible to introduce the state of threat, just like the state of alert, throughout Poland or in a part of the country for a period of no longer than 30 days.


Method of taking control of opposition cities

The serious threats to democracy and self-governance are hidden precisely in this enigmatic phrase: ‘relevant restrictions, prohibitions and orders that are applicable to individuals and entities protecting the population’. According to Article 30, during a state of threat, ‘the Prime Minister is able to issue orders that are binding on bodies of government administration, state-owned legal persons, bodies of local government, local government legal persons and local government organisational units without legal personality, as well as businesses’. Under the same article, ‘in the event of the refusal of bodies of local government to fulfil an order (…), the inappropriate fulfilment of such an order or the failure to demonstrate sufficient effectiveness in performing coordination activities (…), the Prime Minister may suspend such bodies at the request of the voivod responsible for the territory and appoint a government commissioner by way of an administrative decision’.


This gives the government the right to introduce forced management in municipalities, counties and cities, the performance of which is assessed as ‘not sufficiently effective’.


What practical threats arise from this? For example, it is possible to imagine that, in the case of another failure of the Czajka collector, the voivod will first introduce a state of threat in the capital, and then the prime minister will immediately suspend the capital’s opposition mayor at the voivod’s request as not having demonstrated ‘sufficient effectiveness’ and appoints a government commissioner… A pretext will always be found in one city or county or another in which the authorities are not sufficiently obedient to the government. In this way, PiS can take control of selected cities or counties in Poland under the guise of protecting the population.


Anti-Covid lawlessness to be enshrined in Polish law

Furthermore, according to Article 31, during a state of threat or a state of natural disaster, a Police, Border Guard or State Fire Service officer or a soldier of the Polish Armed Forces would have the right to ‘give orders to people to behave in a specific way within the limits required to perform activities related to the response to the threat or natural disaster and in order to perform statutory tasks of each of these formations, respectively’.


And again, the practice of abusing the anti-Covid laws to fight down and repress the opposition (fines, boards, sanitary and epidemiological services) leaves no illusions as to the fact that the PiS authorities are prepared to abuse such statutory powers to, for example, prevent demonstrations and public protests.


The objective of the bill is to ‘ensure the safety of the population, as well as property and infrastructure in a situation of a natural threat or a threat caused by people, by providing measures to protect human life and health, property, infrastructure, cultural heritage and the environment’. This, in turn, constitutes an open door for applying these regulations and restrictions and the powers of the police services not only in the case of natural threats, such as floods, but also, for example, in the case of public protests, which would be considered by the government as a threat ‘caused by human activity’, for instance, to cultural heritage (e.g. churches or Plac Piłsudski) or government or state infrastructure (e.g. the Constitutional Tribunal or the Sejm buildings).


After all, the intentions of the authors of the bill are quite clearly contained in the justification, which is worth quoting: ‘The mechanism proposed by this bill for issuing and fulfilling orders, including the resulting tasks, is modelled on the solutions adopted in the Act on specific solutions related to preventing, counteracting and combating Covid-19, other contagious diseases and crisis situations caused by them of 2 March 2020, which proved effective in the crisis situation caused by the Covid-19 virus epidemic’.


Meanwhile, it was during the battle against the pandemic that the government’s practice produced a parallel alternative crisis management system undermining the current legal and factual state of protection of the population and crisis management based on local authorities.


Now that the Covid justification is disappearing, PiS will be citing the threat of the armed conflict on our borders with the intention of introducing these quasi-authoritarian solutions permanently into the Polish legal order in order to be able to consolidate or defend its authority.


I am deliberately avoiding any further comments on the proposed regulations; everyone should draw their own conclusions on the consequences of giving the voivods, the Minister of Internal Affairs and the Prime Minister of the PiS government such tools of power that are outside the control of the Sejm and the Senate.



Translated by Roman Wojtasz


The article was published on Gazeta Wyborcza website on 28 March 2022.


was the director of the Government Security Centre (2008–09) and Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs (1999–2001 and 2008–09).



March 31, 2022


Supreme CourtDisciplinary ChamberConstitutional TribunalPolandjudgesdisciplinary proceedingsrule of lawZbigniew ZiobroCourt of Justice of the EUEuropean CommissionNational Council of the Judiciaryjudicial independenceEuropean UnionMałgorzata ManowskaAndrzej DudaCourt of JusticeIgor Tuleyadisciplinary systemEuropean Court of Human RightsJarosław KaczyńskiMateusz MorawieckiCJEUMinister of Justicemuzzle lawCommissioner for Human RightsNational Recovery PlandemocracyWaldemar ŻurekPrzemysław Radzikpresidential electionselectionsKamil Zaradkiewiczdisciplinary commissionerPiotr Schabmedia freedomneo-judgeselections 2023judiciaryFirst President of the Supreme CourtAdam Bodnarpreliminary rulingsSupreme Administrative CourtHungarycriminal lawelections 2020K 3/21Dagmara Pawełczyk-WoickaNational Council for JudiciaryharassmentJulia PrzyłębskaprosecutorsŁukasz PiebiakMichał LasotaBeata MorawiecPaweł JuszczyszynCourt of Justice of the European UnionPrime MinisterPresidentProsecutor GeneralConstitutionCOVID-19European Arrest WarrantMaciej NawackiCriminal ChamberRegional Court in KrakówRecovery FundExtraordinary Control and Public Affairs ChamberEU budgetfreedom of expressiondisciplinary liability for judgesWojciech HermelińskiMarek SafjanMałgorzata GersdorfSejmMaciej Ferekfreedom of assemblyconditionalityLaw and JusticeprosecutionNCJMinistry of JusticeJustice FundNational ProsecutorPiSStanisław PiotrowiczAleksander StepkowskiOSCEPresident of the Republic of PolandimmunityAnna DalkowskaNational Public ProsecutorCouncil of Europecriminal proceedingsStanisław Biernatconditionality mechanismWłodzimierz WróbelLabour and Social Security Chambercommission on Russian influence2017policeJustice Defence Committee – KOSFreedom HouseSupreme Court PresidentArticle 7Venice CommissionPM Mateusz MorawieckiNational Electoral CommissionJarosław WyrembakAndrzej Zollacting first president of the Supreme CourtOrdo IurisMay 10 2020 electionsPresident of PolandLGBTXero Flor w Polsce Sp. z o.o. v. PolandBroda and Bojara v PolandReczkowicz and Others v. Polandmedia independenceIustitiaKrystian MarkiewiczSylwia Gregorczyk-AbramAmsterdam District CourtcourtsKrzysztof ParchimowiczMichał WawrykiewiczArticle 6 ECHRTHEMISEAWUrsula von der LeyenTVPmediaLech GarlickiEwa ŁętowskaAndrzej StępkaPiotr GąciarekcorruptionP 7/20K 7/21Lex DudaNational Reconstruction PlanProfessional Liability ChambersuspensionparliamentJarosław DudziczChamber of Professional Liabilityelectoral codePiotr Prusinowskidemocratic backslidingdecommunizationLaw on the NCJrecommendationHuman Rights CommissionerCCBEThe Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europepublic opinion pollreportEuropean ParliamentZiobrointimidation of dissenterstransferretirement agePiebiak gatehuman rightsEuropean Association of Judges11 January March in WarsawcoronavirusC-791/19Piotr PszczółkowskiGeneral Assembly of the Supreme Court Judgeslex NGOcivil societyRussiaJarosław GowinLGBT ideology free zonescriminal codeSenateZuzanna Rudzińska-BluszczMarcin WarchołdefamationFree CourtsEwa WrzosekEU law primacyLex Super OmniaAdam TomczyńskiBelgiumNetherlandsBogdan Święczkowskijudcial independenceMaciej MiteraViktor OrbanOLAFNext Generation EUvetoabortionJózef IwulskiTeresa Dębowska-RomanowskaKazimierz DziałochaMirosław GranatAdam JamrózStefan JaworskiBiruta Lewaszkiewicz-PetrykowskaWojciech ŁączkowskiMarek MazurkiewiczAndrzej MączyńskiJanusz NiemcewiczMałgorzata Pyziak- SzafnickaStanisław RymarFerdynand RymarzAndrzej RzeplińskiJerzy StępieńPiotr TulejaSławomira Wronkowska-JaśkiewiczMirosław WyrzykowskiBohdan ZdziennickiMarek ZubikDidier ReyndersSLAPPOKO.pressDariusz ZawistowskiMichał LaskowskiMarek PietruszyńskiKrystyna PawłowiczMariusz MuszyńskiPaweł FilipekMaciej TaborowskiMarian BanaśSupreme Audit OfficeAdam SynakiewiczBelarusstate of emergencyKrakówXero Flor v. PolandAstradsson v IcelandK 6/21Civil ChamberJoanna Misztal-KoneckaPegasusMariusz KamińskisurveillanceCentral Anti-Corruption BureauJoanna Hetnarowicz-SikoraEdyta BarańskaUkraineKonrad WytrykowskiJakub IwaniecDariusz DrajewiczRafał Puchalskismear campaignmilestonesConstitutional Tribunal PresidentMarzanna Piekarska-Drążekelectoral processWojciech Maczugapublic medialexTuskcourt changeselections integrityelections fairnessabuse of state resourcespopulismequal treatmentfundamental rightsCT PresidentEUWhite Paperlustrationtransitional justice2018Nations in TransitCouncil of the EUStanisław ZabłockiLIBE CommitteeFrans TimmermansUS Department of StateSwieczkowskiadvocate generalpress releaseRights and Values ProgrammeC-619/18defamatory statementsWorld Justice Project awardWojciech SadurskijudgePechKochenovEvgeni TanchevFreedom in the WorldECJFrackowiakAmnesty Internationaltrans-Atlantic valuesLSOlawyersAct of 20 December 2019repressive actKoen LenaertsharrassmentAlina CzubieniakGerard BirgfellerEwa Maciejewskapostal votepostal vote billresolution of 23 January 2020Leon KieresPKWinfringment actionEU valuesENCJIsraelforeign agents lawOrganization of Security and Co-operation in EuropeFirst President of the Suprme CourtLGBT free zonesequalityChamber of Extraordinary Verificationhate crimeshate speechGrzęda v PolandŻurek v PolandSobczyńska and Others v PolandRafał Trzaskowskimedia lawPrzemysła RadzikElżbieta KarskaMarcin RomanowskiJacek CzaputowiczPrzemysław Czarneklegislative practiceENAZbigniew BoniekOmbudsmanKraśnikNorwayNorwegian fundsNorwegian Ministry of Foreign AffairsC-487/19Article 10 ECHRRegional Court in AmsterdamOpenbaar MinisterieAK judgmentSimpson judgmentForum Współpracy Sędziówpublic broadcastermutual trustLMIrelandIrena MajcherAmsterdamthe Regional Court in WarsawUnited NationsLeszek Mazurinterim measuresautocratizationMultiannual Financial Frameworkabortion rulingproteststhe NetherlandsDenmarkSwedenFinlandMariusz KrasońGermanyCelmerC354/20 PPUC412/20 PPUAusl 301 AR 104/19Karlsruheact on misdemeanoursCivil Service ActParliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europemedia taxadvertising taxmediabezwyboruJacek KurskiKESMAIndex.huTelex.huJelenJózsef SzájerKlubrádióStrategic Lawsuits Against Public ParticipationGazeta WyborczaPollitykaBrussels IRome IIArticle 2Forum shoppingtransparencyEuropean Economic and Social CommitteeSebastian KaletaC-156/21C-157/21Marek PiertuszyńskiNational Prosecutor’s OfficeBogdan ŚwiączkowskiDisicplinary ChamberTribunal of StateOlsztyn courtPrzemysła CzarnekEducation MinisterIpsosOlimpia Barańska-MałuszeHudocKonrad SzymańskiPiotr BogdanowiczPiotr Burasauthoritarian equilibriumArticle 258clientelismoligarchic systemEuropean Public Prosecutor's OfficePolish National FoundationLux VeritatisMałgorzata BednarekPiotr WawrzykTVNjournalistslexTVNPolish mediaRzeszówborderprimacyEU treatiesAgnieszka Niklas-BibikSłupsk Regional CourtMaciej RutkiewiczMirosław Wróblewskiright to protestSławomir JęksaWiktor JoachimkowskiRoman GiertychMichał WośMinistry of FinanceJacek SasinErnest BejdaThe First President of the Supreme CourtMaciej CzajkaMariusz JałoszewskiŁukasz RadkepolexitDolińska-Ficek and Ozimek v PolandPaulina Kieszkowska-KnapikMaria Ejchart-DuboisAgreement for the Rule of LawPorozumienie dla PraworządnościAct sanitising the judiciaryMarek AstCourt of Appeal in KrakówPutinismKaczyńskiright to fair trialPaulina AslanowiczJarosław MatrasMałgorzata Wąsek-Wiaderekct on the Protection of the Populatiolegislationlex WośRome StatuteInternational Criminal CourtAntykastaStanisław ZdunIrena BochniakKrystyna Morawa-FryźlewiczKatarzyna ChmuraGrzegorz FurmankiewiczMarek JaskulskiJoanna Kołodziej-MichałowiczEwa ŁąpińskaZbigniew ŁupinaPaweł StyrnaKasta/AntykastaAndrzej SkowronŁukasz BilińskiIvan MischenkoMonika FrąckowiakArkadiusz CichockiEmilia SzmydtTomasz SzmydtE-mail scandalDworczyk leaksMichał Dworczykmedia pluralism#RecoveryFilesrepairing the rule of lawBohdan BieniekMarcin KrajewskiMałgorzata Dobiecka-WoźniakChamber of Extraordinary Control and Public AffairsWiesław KozielewiczNational Recovery Plan Monitoring CommitteeGrzegorz PudaPiotr MazurekJerzy KwaśniewskiPetros Tovmasyancourt presidentsODIHRFull-Scale Election Observation MissionNGOKarolina MiklaszewskaRafał LisakMałgorzata FroncJędrzej Dessoulavy-ŚliwińskiSebastian MazurekElżbieta Jabłońska-MalikSzymon Szynkowski vel SękJoanna Scheuring-Wielgusinsulting religious feelingsoppositionAdam GendźwiłłDariusz Dończyktest of independenceTomasz KoszewskiJakub KwiecińskidiscriminationAct on the Supreme Courtelectoral commissionsEuropean Court of HuKrzysztof RączkaPoznańKoan LenaertsKarol WeitzKaspryszyn v PolandNCR&DNCBiRThe National Centre for Research and DevelopmentEuropean Anti-Fraud Office OLAFJustyna WydrzyńskaAgnieszka Brygidyr-DoroszJoanna KnobelCrimes of espionageextraordinary commissionZbigniew KapińskiAnna GłowackaCourt of Appeal in WarsawOsiatyński'a ArchiveUS State DepartmentAssessment Actenvironmentinvestmentstrategic investmentgag lawsuitslex RaczkowskiPiotr Raczkowskithe Spy ActdisinformationNational Broadcasting Councilelection fairnessDobrochna Bach-GoleckaRafał WojciechowskiAleksandra RutkowskaGeneral Court of the EUArkadiusz Radwan