Presidential elections in Poland: what we know so far

Share

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

More

Jarosław Kaczyński's party pushed for presidential elections on the 10th of May at all costs. The plan backfired. The election will be most likely be held on the 28th of June or at the beginning of July. An explainer about the biggest political crisis in Poland's recent history



by Michał Danielewski

 

It is one of the greatest political crises in recent history of Poland. On the 10th of May 2020, the presidential elections did not take place. No one called it off, but no one was able to vote, even should they have wanted to do so.

 

Jarosław Kaczyński’s populist, right-wing ruling party Prawo i Sprawiedliwość (PiS) was determined not to declare a state of emergency, which would have allowed the election to be postponed to a time when the COVID-19 threat has passed.

 

Until the last moment, PiS attempted to push through a postal ballot, without the involvement of the National Electoral Commission, hoping that the election, boycotted by the opposition, would give President Andrzej Duda a second term.

 

Setting the Scene

 

On 6th of March there are already a hundred thousand infected people around the world. The COVID-19 epidemic is spreading across Europe at lightning speed. Poland’s neighbour Germany has already recorded 536 cases. The President of Poland calls a joint press conference with Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki. They announce that the President will sign a bill giving PLN 2 billion to the state-controlled national media, including the public broadcaster, a propaganda machine.

 

In Poland, virus was at that time still considered an external threat, although the first case of infection was reported on the 4th of March. Poland is not alone in such thinking in Europe. But only in Poland will a disregard for the epidemic lead to such serious political consequences.

 

The Nuclear Option

Also on 6th of March the opposition-controlled Senate passed a so-called special COVID-19 bill, which granted the government extraordinary powers.

 

The government received an instrument which allowed them to bypass the constitution: they could now use any tools the constitution provides for states of emergency, without formally declaring such a state.

 

Why is that important? Declaring a state of emergency automatically postpones any elections until after the threat is over. It is the only instrument of law which makes changing the date of an election possible. The special bill gave the government free rein: they could control the date of the election.

 

Why did the opposition agree to this? According to the government, the law was to be a nuclear option which would not need to be used. Reality proved these promises to be empty.

 

On the 13th of March, the government declared a “state of epidemiological threat”: shops, bars, services and the borders were closed, group gatherings were forbidden.

 

On the 20th of March, a state of epidemic was declared. Theoretically, the government could have closed any city as “ground zero” and the election still would have had to take place on the 10th of May.

 

Clumsy Autocrats

On the 6th of April, we had 4 413 infections in Poland. On that day, PiS pushed a bill concerning a postal vote election, organised by the Polish Post and under the control of one of the ministers, through Parliament. The election ceased to be democratic.

 

The new bill still needed to go through the opposition-controlled Senate. Nonetheless, the government started preparations: without any legal backing, in total chaos, they printed ballots and attempted to prepare the Polish Post for their distribution. The ballots were leaked, the media reported electoral documents flying in the streets, and the majority of the opposition’s electorate declared that they would be boycotting the election.

 

With each passing day, it became increasingly evident that the ruling camp intended to go through, at any cost, with an election which would mean a de facto end to democracy in Poland.

 

However, a small issue cropped up: the government did not know how to organise said election.

 

At the beginning of May, it became very clear that the government had failed completely, organisation-wise. PiS’s coalition partner, Porozumienieparty led by Jarosław Gowin, unexpectedly entered the scene. Gowin, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Science and Higher Education, demanded that Kaczyński postpone the election.

 

After a few days of testing each other’s resolve, the politicians reached a compromise. They agreed that the election would take place on the 10th of May, but there would be no vote. And actually, it would take place at the end of June, at the earliest, under reinstated democratic control. The disintegrating electoral process seemed to have been patched up.

 

Nothing could have been farther from the truth.

 

One crisis after another

On the 9th of May, a day before the election in which no votes were to be cast, Polish politics were rocked by another crisis. Seeing Duda’s worsening polls, Kaczyński broke the agreement he had struck with his coalition partner and decided to hold the election on Saturday the 23rd of May. This would necessitate the government declaring an additional work-free day, a minor, irrelevant concern.

 

Many nervous discussions took place at the party’s headquarters, there was talk of dissolving the coalition, dismissing the Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki.

 

At the last moment, Kaczyński backed down and went back to what was previously agreed.

 

The election will, therefore, be most likely be held on the 28th of June or at the beginning of July.

 

It will no longer be a postal vote, but rather a mixed system. However, the bill is still in Parliament and the proceedings are taking place in an atmosphere of political war. In the meantime, the epidemic in Poland is not letting up, active cases have been growing more numerous since the beginning of May.

 

Translated by Jim Todd



Author


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


More

Published

May 27, 2020

Tags

Supreme Courtdisciplinary proceedingsDisciplinary Chamberrule of lawjudicial independencePolandEuropean CommissionConstitutional TribunaljudgesCourt of Justice of the EUZbigniew ZiobroNational Council of the JudiciaryCourt of JusticeEuropean UnionAndrzej DudaIgor TuleyaMałgorzata Manowskadisciplinary systemMinister of JusticeCommissioner for Human Rightspresidential electionsjudiciarypreliminary rulingsdemocracyCJEUmuzzle lawJarosław Kaczyńskielections 2020Beata MorawiecFirst President of the Supreme CourtprosecutorsHungaryEuropean Arrest WarrantMateusz MorawieckiAdam BodnarCOVID-19Kamil ZaradkiewiczEuropean Court of Human Rightsdisciplinary commissionerPresidentfreedom of expressioncriminal lawOSCENational Public Prosecutorcriminal proceedingsExtraordinary Control and Public Affairs ChamberProsecutor GeneralSupreme Administrative CourtconditionalityConstitutionCriminal ChamberLaw and JusticeprosecutionNCJNational ProsecutorelectionsMałgorzata Gersdorfacting first president of the Supreme CourtOrdo IurisMay 10 2020 electionsWaldemar Żurekmedia independenceAmsterdam District CourtKrzysztof ParchimowiczEAWmediaPaweł JuszczyszynimmunityAnna DalkowskaCouncil of EuropePrime Minister2017freedom of assemblyJulia PrzyłębskaFreedom HouseVenice CommissionEU budgetWłodzimierz WróbelPM Mateusz MorawieckiAndrzej StępkaMinistry of JusticeC-791/19disciplinary liability for judgesNational Electoral CommissionWojciech HermelińskiAndrzej ZollMarek SafjanGeneral Assembly of the Supreme Court JudgesAleksander StepkowskiPresident of PolandJarosław GowinLGBTLGBT ideology free zonesSejmMichał LasotaZuzanna Rudzińska-BluszczSylwia Gregorczyk-AbramdefamationTHEMISMaciej NawackiTVPLex Super OmniaAdam TomczyńskiBelgiumNetherlandsBogdan ŚwięczkowskiPiotr SchabPrzemysław Radzikdemocratic backslidingViktor OrbandecommunizationNext Generation EUvetopoliceJózef IwulskiLaw on the NCJLech GarlickirecommendationHuman Rights CommissionerCCBEThe Council of Bars and Law Societies of EuropeSupreme Court Presidentreportmedia freedomArticle 7European ParliamentZiobroconditionality mechanismMichał LaskowskiMarek Pietruszyńskihuman rightsEuropean Association of Judges11 January March in WarsawcoronavirusPiSresolution of 23 January 2020Stanisław PiotrowiczPiotr PszczółkowskiJarosław WyrembakLeon KieresPKWinfringment actionEU valuesENCJlex NGOcivil societyRussiaIsraelforeign agents lawOrganization of Security and Co-operation in EuropeFirst President of the Suprme CourtPresident of the Republic of PolandLGBT free zonesequalityChamber of Extraordinary Verificationhate crimeshate speechcriminal codeGrzęda v PolandXero Flor w Polsce Sp. z o.o. v. PolandBroda and Bojara v PolandŻurek v PolandSobczyńska and Others v PolandReczkowicz and Others v. PolandRafał Trzaskowskimedia lawIustitiaKrystian MarkiewiczPrzemysła RadzikSenateMarcin WarchołElżbieta KarskaMarcin RomanowskiJacek CzaputowiczPrzemysław Czarneklegislative practiceENAZbigniew BoniekcourtsOmbudsmanKraśnikNorwayNorwegian fundsNorwegian Ministry of Foreign AffairsMichał WawrykiewiczFree CourtsC-487/19Article 6 ECHRArticle 10 ECHRRegional Court in AmsterdamOpenbaar MinisterieUrsula von der LeyenEwa WrzosekAK judgmentSimpson judgmentEU law primacyForum Współpracy Sędziówpublic broadcastermutual trustLMIrelandIrena MajcherAmsterdamthe Regional Court in WarsawUnited Nationsjudcial independenceLeszek MazurMaciej Miterapopulisminterim measuresOLAFautocratizationMultiannual Financial Frameworkabortion rulingequal treatmentabortionprotestsfundamental rightsthe NetherlandsDenmarkSwedenFinlandMariusz KrasońCT PresidentGermanyCelmerC354/20 PPUJustice Defence Committee – KOSC412/20 PPUAusl 301 AR 104/19Karlsruheact on misdemeanoursCivil Service ActParliamentary Assembly of the Council of EuropeEUStanisław BiernatTeresa Dębowska-RomanowskaWhite PaperKazimierz DziałochalustrationMirosław Granattransitional justiceAdam JamrózStefan JaworskiBiruta Lewaszkiewicz-PetrykowskaWojciech ŁączkowskiEwa ŁętowskaMarek MazurkiewiczAndrzej MączyńskiJanusz NiemcewiczMałgorzata Pyziak- SzafnickaStanisław Rymarpublic opinion pollFerdynand RymarzAndrzej RzeplińskiJerzy Stępień2018Piotr TulejaNations in TransitSławomira Wronkowska-JaśkiewiczCouncil of the EUMirosław WyrzykowskiBohdan ZdziennickiMarek Zubikmedia taxStanisław Zabłockiadvertising taxmediabezwyboruJacek KurskiKESMAIndex.huTelex.huJelenJózsef SzájerDidier ReyndersKlubrádióSLAPPLIBE CommitteeStrategic Lawsuits Against Public ParticipationFrans TimmermansGazeta WyborczaOKO.pressUS Department of StatePollitykaBrussels IRome IISwieczkowskiArticle 2Forum shoppingadvocate generalDariusz ZawistowskitransparencyEuropean Economic and Social Committeepress releaseSebastian KaletaRights and Values ProgrammeC-156/21C-157/21C-619/18Marek Piertuszyńskidefamatory statementsWorld Justice Project awardNational Prosecutor’s Officeintimidation of dissentersWojciech SadurskiBogdan ŚwiączkowskiDisicplinary ChamberjudgeTribunal of StatetransferK 3/21PechOlsztyn courtKochenovEvgeni TanchevFreedom in the WorldECJFrackowiakretirement ageAmnesty InternationalŁukasz PiebiakPiebiak gatetrans-Atlantic valuesLSOlawyersAct of 20 December 2019repressive actKoen LenaertsharrassmentAlina CzubieniakJustice FundGerard BirgfellerEwa Maciejewskapostal votepostal vote bill