"Law or lawlessness"

Arrests, prosecutorial investigations, indictments and investigative commissions, as well as accompanying media campaigns discrediting people against whom the presumption of innocence applies, became almost everyday during the reign of Prime Minister Donald Tusk and his coalitions. Under the slogan of “accounting” for their predecessors, ministers and politicians make decisions that rise strong opposition not only in opposition environments but besides among independent intellectuals, scientists and lawyers.

The issue of violation by state authorities and politicians was the subject of a debate during the 14th legislature Polish large Project, entitled “Law or Lawlessness?”

Its participants were academic lawyers: Prof. Jan Majchrowski and Prof. Ryszard Piotrowski and erstwhile politicians, and now publicists and analysts: Marek Jurek – erstwhile talker of the Sejm and the Euro MP, and Jan Rokita erstwhile Minister and MP of respective term.

Participants in the discussions examined any aspects of Donald Tusk's government policy, not only in the area of justice, and examples of spectacular violation of the regulation of law and constitutional standards. Lawyers pointed to a fundamental change in the explanation of the law by the ruling coalition politicians and the accompanying opinions of any lawyers completely different from the canon of jurisdiction that is in force in university cathedrals. As an example, they pointed out the public statements of the legal authority of the University of Warsaw, prof. Sadurski, who, in relation to the erstwhile minister, uses the word "possessed criminal Romanowski". So a lawyer, de facto the standard of presumption of innocence, cancels.

This norm, which belongs to the sphere of these cultural norms, which we call the foundation of our civilisation. So we are dealing with an act of barbarism. present there is simply a LOGIC of REVOLUTION in Poland according to which our enemies are outlawed. No standards, in practice, apply to them. This is simply a coup that actually nullifies the concept of the regulation of law and establishes another order that Prime Minister Tusk called "a fighting democracy".

That is why the Minister of Justice present says, "Yes we have a problem, we gotta solve it, but we will find the legal basis." In practice, this means that if they do not find it they will order a legal opinion that will make the missing basis and description as expected by the contracting authority.

According to academic lawyers participating in the debate, there is now a reversal of concepts, which is tantamount to a change in civilization carried out simultaneously besides in another spheres of life specified as culture and education.

On the another hand, Jan Rokita, erstwhile examining examples of violations of the regulation of law by the Donald Tusk government, drew attention to the sources of this phenomenon, which are outside the Polish political scene, and which can be located both in Brussels and in another capitals of the European Union. His thesis boils down to specified a constatuation that in the West, the proceeding with the conservative right is the primary political goal of the liberal-left elite and Tusk operates in Poland in the same direction, having full support of these leaders, at the expense of the regulation of law and simple justice.

Following further speeches in this debate, it is worth examining in more item the basic thesis of erstwhile talker of the Sejm, Mark Jurek, who according to the opinion

Some historians, as 1 of the authors of the Declaration of the Ideas of the Youth Movement of Poland, are among the historical founders of the modern right in Poland.

At the outset, he expressed his belief that we, as Poles, must answer the first fundamental question: whether we want to inactive have our own Polish state or not. Is it adequate for us to lead the function of political elites in Brussels where a real systemic revolution is already being implemented, which already includes Poland. Revolutions begin with acts of bloodless, but then utopia collides with reality, with resistance, and begins force utilizing state force. In the West and in Poland this force is already visible. The place of constitutional democracy, where power is limited by the letter of law and customs, comes from the Jacobic democracy, whose pattern derives from the revolution in France from the late 18th century.

Marek Jurek emphasises that so far power has been dispersed between institutions

Democratic, and both sides of the political process mutually recognised their rights to political action and to negociate solutions to social problems within the framework outlined by the Constitution and the Sejm laws. Today, the power implements a different practice of governance: we do what we announced and this is our legitimacy for our decisions, due to the fact that the voters chose us. This is our legal basis, our will and our constituents. For example, erstwhile Minister Nowacka hears allegations that her decisions do not have a legal basis, she answers in this way.

The borders are determined by political will, not law. The rule of legalism is simply ignored. At the same time, Tusk and his ministers declare that legal expertise is in charge of everything they do, and the decisions of the Constitutional Court, the president of the ultimate Court and the alleged "neasures" are invalid due to the fact that so the Prime Minister "understands the law" and his lawyers wrote to him.

Thus, it is not constitutional norms and the state institutions appointed to do so, but lawyers working on behalf of the government that outline the legal framework for government action.

According to erstwhile talker of the Sejm Marek Jurek, that is the fundamental difference between the disinvolvement of the Pis with Jarosław Kaczyński, and what the current government coalition and Prime Minister Tusk does.

The erstwhile majority of the Sejm and the Government of the Pistol sought to realise constitutional values even if the methods utilized for this intent could, legally speaking, rise doubts. Article 30 of our Constitution points to constitutional sources of law, and thus besides values protected by the 1997 Constitution of the Republic of Poland. Among them, the primal place is natural, or automatically owned by everyone since the conception of human dignity.

Referring to the past of post-war Poland, i.e. the Polish People's Republic, Marek Jurek points out that the erstwhile power rightly sought to break this unholy organization memory

a judiciary that has never cleared its ranks of conformism and negative "standards". They were based on the fatal presumption that all judges were professionals and that "there were times" that belonging to the PPR or following orders from the communist organization were inevitable. And besides, you know... geopolitics, or real russian domination. Conformism towards communist power appears here as a natural, apparent justification for mistrust of judicial independency and justice. The justification of everything in the introduction to the Constitution is described as a time erstwhile human dignity and human rights were besides abused in cooperation with the judiciary. The right-wing coalition was about restoring, or alternatively creating a judiciary worthy of not PRL, but independent Poland.

It is worth recalling that the negative assessment of the state of justice was not the consequence of the political rhetoric of Law and Justice. The argument that “Polish courts are in a state of decline” was announced by TVN many years ago (after the Prussian mafia trial). Yes, it is “ FREE MEDIA” or “highest authority” of modern Poland, he said.

In Mark Jurk's assessment, the actual intentions of the current Tusk government showed at a protest rally, which he, inactive as the leader of the opposition, called to openly challenge and reject the judgement of the Constitutional Court of 2022. judgement confirming the primacy of the Polish Constitution over EU law. Tusk thus questioned the confirmation by the authority of this appointment and right of the apparent provision of the Polish Constitution, and the erstwhile 2006 decision of the Constitutional Court on the Accession Treaty. Poland signed the Treaty of Accession due to the fact that it did not deny the primacy of the Polish Constitution. In another words, the Treaty does not establish a supremacy of the laws of the EU Parliament over the constitutional order in Poland and does not thus deny the sovereignty of our country. This basic constitutional norm was denied by the current Prime Minister. He stated that the constitution is subject to EU laws and another regulations – due to the fact that he has specified conviction.

erstwhile talker of the Sejm Marek Jurek points out that what the government coalition is doing is not fighting for the regulation of law, it is the successive stages of the revolution, which is to overthrow political decisions, the current legal order.

This applies, for example, to household rights, or Article 40, or education rights, Article 72. The openly denied and completely rejected by the Tusk government was the key constitutional value – the protection of life.

And it's not just about methods of combating these values, which is, for example, combating by intimidating doctors who don't want to kill unborn children, it's about something more.

Minister Nowacka says to school children about the erstwhile government: “Your historians at the Institute of National Memory wanted to compose textbooks!”. This charge is not just a curiosium. This is the accomplishment of the political goal of the present power. Like the Second War past Museum, it is about eliminating politically incorrect heroes of our national history. This is about questioning the rule of gratitude in the preamble to the Constitution for erstwhile generations of Poles and the work to pass on national tradition without political ad hoc censorship.

Marek Jurek emphasises that these and akin decisions of the government are tantamount to negation of the basic norms and values of our Constitution. And that is the fundamental difference between the disinvolvement of the Government of Law and Justice and the subversive activity of the Government of Tusk.

In order to halt this wave of lawlessness, we request to build a political consensus of the parliamentary majority, which will be ready to rebuild the foundation of the independent Polish state on the values of solidarity and Wojtylian values.

It is essential to make a government that must respect the constitutional rule that it can act only within the limits of its competence, closely outlined by the Constitution and the Sejm laws.

What we are witnessing present shows that the current authorities are not going to respect this principle.

During the debate, Marek Jurek besides highlighted another aspect of policy

Donald Tusk and his government. Years ago, the word “African democracy” was utilized in the literature of the subject. It dealt with the phenomenon seen at the time of the alleged decolonization in Africa, which was that after the first elections in an independent state, the winners effectively eliminated political competition that lost the election. In the next election, she no longer competed. At the moment, in Poland, we have a Jacobin democracy in which the power does not recognise the mandate of the opposition, despite the fact that in the democratic strategy both parties belong to the same political community of the Polish state.

In specified a democratic system, the opposition has guaranteed rights to act which must not be broken. This rule is rejected today, and Tusk carries out political experiments breaking the law and violating the regulation of law. But it is peculiarly crucial in this situation that specified action by the government is only possible thanks to the support of abroad institutions that helped to win elections against the PIS. Political sanctions against Poland have been utilized for this purpose, specified as financial blackmail and illegal blocking of funds due to us from the European Union. Marek Jurek is convinced that this may have prompted any voters to support the coalition of opponents of the PIS. The assurance of Tusk and his background stems from strong abroad work, which gives him the momentum and sense of impunity.

EU officers and politicians have already utilized these methods of repression against east flank countries during the first migration crisis in 2014/ 2015. Sanctions were applied against countries that defended EU borders. There were then fresh interpretations of the law that identify prohibitions in the area of state safety with violations of civilian rights and freedoms. Classical demagoguery has emerged and is being applied, according to which bans harm people and must be removed in the name of overriding values, and increasingly limited the competence of state institutions to, for example, politically correct NGOs. This is all in the name of human rights and at the same time at the expense of the regulation of law and the provisions of the European Treaties.

It is so not a substance of case that the European Parliament has already expressed its view that since we respect the right of man to free movement, alleged illegal immigration is allegedly an absurd concept. So we are already dealing with internationalist Marxism, that is, the drive to abolish the borders and destruct natural national and state communities in order to implement a fresh utopia. For this purpose, the delegitisation of the border as specified and the competence of the state in this area and the sovereign state power is needed.

Regardless of the above-mentioned opinions of the participants in the debate on law and lawlessness in the current government coalition, it is worth considering this context.

The political support of EU politicians for Donald Tusk and his opposition policies, including the regulation of law, is closely linked to their political precedence of marginalising and eliminating right-wing opposition in the countries of the European Union, which hinders the implementation of ideological, transnational utopia and its hidden interests of European oligarchy and global corporations.

Krzysztof Baranowski