The attack on election commissioners, whose terms end in 2028, leaves no doubt that Tusk’s government is thereby preparing for the 2027 parliamentary elections, which it has no chance of winning in a fair competition. “The commissioners are to be replaced by people from Giertych, the Silni Razem crowd, and Żurek. And to guarantee that the announced election results will be the ones the government expects, not the ones voters expect,” Prof. Przemysław Czarnek, a constitutional lawyer and Law and Justice (PiS) MP, tells Gazeta Polska.
Polling trends are relentless. In 2027, the December 13 coalition has no chance of holding on to power in honest elections, if, of course, it lasts that long. That follows from current polls, but the government’s attacks on President Karol Nawrocki, who has a very strong mandate, will, it seems, month by month intensify this trend.
Matecki: “Eight-stars” as election commissioners
Dariusz Matecki, a PiS MP who, during the presidential elections, created a civic mechanism to check whether voters voting outside their place of residence were not casting ballots multiple times, dubbed by the media the “Matecki app”, has no doubt what we are dealing with. “They want to falsify the elections because they fear that Donald Tusk, Adam Bodnar, Waldemar Żurek, or Dariusz Korneluk may end up in the place where I recently was, but justly and for a long time, because an attempted coup d’état is punishable by even life imprisonment.”
In his view, many factors occurring simultaneously point to an intention to falsify the elections. “They want to prepare today so that they can falsify the elections in 2027. This is indicated by the lack of introduction of a mechanism preventing electoral tourism, that is, multiple voting by persons who have certificates allowing them to vote outside their place of residence. This is to be accompanied by illegal financing with millions of euros for a hate campaign, which they tested in Rafał Trzaskowski’s election campaign,” he says.
However, the key element is the dismissal of election commissioners and their replacement with their own thugs. “That would mean they will make commissioners out of people like those they made lay judges in the Supreme Court, that is, a rabble bearing eight-star slogans, as well as activists from the politicized associations Themis and Iustitia,” Matecki believes.
Giertych, Żurek, and the motion to dismiss the commissioners
What role do commissioners play in elections? An absolutely crucial one. The election commissioner is the plenipotentiary of the National Electoral Commission (PKW), appointed for an area constituting a voivodeship or part of a voivodeship. There are 100 commissioners. They are selected “from among persons with higher legal education and who provide a guarantee of proper performance of this function.”
How did the idea arise to unlawfully dismiss the current commissioners? It was one of the first decisions of Minister Waldemar Żurek, announced at a time when his patron Roman Giertych was asserting that the elections had been falsified. On July 31, Minister Żurek announced that he had applied to the head of the Ministry of Interior and Administration to consider dismissing 44 judges who serve as election commissioners. According to Żurek, these judges are a group who, in his view, “by entangling themselves in procedures contrary to our constitution, do not provide a guarantee of proper performance of the functions they hold.”
On August 4, the Ministry of Interior and Administration turned to the chairman of the National Electoral Commission to dismiss from the function of election commissioner those judges who “actively supported the selection of judges to the so-called neoKRS and took part in the nomination procedure.” “Further performance by these persons of such an important function constitutes a violation of the constitutional guarantees of the independence of the judiciary and creates a real risk of violating the principle of reliability and transparency of the electoral process,” it was stated in a letter dated August 3, which called for “immediate action aimed at the prompt dismissal of the indicated persons from the function of election commissioner.”
Sylwester Marciniak: “The regulations are precise”
This was an action devoid of any legal basis. “The provisions of the Electoral Code say that the head of the Ministry of Interior and Administration submits a motion to appoint, not to dismiss. That’s one. As for the dismissal of election commissioners, the provisions are precise. The Electoral Code indicates that the PKW appoints commissioners for a period of five years. The PKW dismisses a commissioner only in the event of failure to perform or improper performance of duties,” said Sylwester Marciniak, the chairman of the PKW, about these motions. “If we were to accept that these persons do not provide a guarantee, then what about the elections for which (…) they were responsible?” the head of the PKW also asked. And he added: “One can also ask why we are to remove them from work in electoral bodies if, at the same time, these persons continue to adjudicate. This is such an inconsistency – of both the minister of the interior and the minister of justice.”
Indeed, the Electoral Code is absolutely unambiguous here. It follows from it that “An election commissioner may not belong to political parties or conduct public activity incompatible with the function performed. A person convicted by a final judgment for an intentional offense prosecuted by public indictment or an intentional fiscal offense may not be an election commissioner.” To ensure impartiality, “candidates in elections, election proxies, financial proxies, trusted representatives, electoral officials, and members of an electoral commission may not be election commissioners.”
And when can an election commissioner end his or her term early? “The function of election commissioner expires in the event of resignation from the function, death, reaching the age of 70, signing consent to be nominated to an electoral commission, running in elections, or taking on the function of election proxy, financial proxy, trusted representative, electoral official, or upon dismissal,” we read. When is dismissal possible? “The National Electoral Commission dismisses an election commissioner before the expiry of the period for which he or she was appointed in the event of failure to perform or improper performance of the duties of an election commissioner.”
Czarnek: Żurek is to cynically violate the law until the very end
Hence, the Tusk government’s assertions that a commissioner can be dismissed for other reasons are an usurpation. Judge Łukasz Piebiak, president of the association Lawyers for Poland, tells Gazeta Polska: “The Electoral Code defines very clearly when the PKW may dismiss an election commissioner. Each such case must be treated individually. And the reason for this cannot be actions unrelated to commission activities. But the issue of the subsidy for PiS already showed that there are actions there in which politics trumps law.”
Przemysław Czarnek, a lawyer, constitutional scholar, and PiS MP, says this about the government’s actions: “We live in a post-law state; the rule-of-law state no longer exists. And Minister Żurek is a minister of post-law. He was appointed minister in order to cynically violate the law, right up to the very end.”
According to Judge Łukasz Piebiak, this obviously unlawful action will have consequences. “In the Lawyers for Poland association, there are a dozen or so election commissioners, and they will certainly not leave such attempts without reaction, and there is also a second legal issue here. Serving as a commissioner is also work, and thus being fired from it is subject to review by the labor court,” he says.
The Sword of Damocles, i.e. Article 231 and 10 years in prison
At the time of closing this issue of Gazeta Polska, we did not yet know how, on Monday, September 22, the PKW would act on the motion to dismiss the commissioners. As our informants told us, the pressure on PKW members to dismiss the commissioners was very strong; they were subjected to enormous pressure.
Within it, the current government has an informal one-vote majority – 5 to 4. But not all of its nominees embraced with enthusiasm the fact that they are to break the law so openly. “The pressure on PKW members to dismiss the commissioners is very strong. But at the same time, Article 231 of the Penal Code hangs over them like a sword of Damocles. It is obvious that when the current power arrangement loses influence, a prosecutor will step in on this matter,” our informant says.
This article states that “A public official who, exceeding his authority or failing to fulfill his duties, acts to the detriment of the public or private interest is subject to a penalty of imprisonment of up to 3 years.” However, “If the perpetrator commits the act (…) in order to obtain financial or personal benefit, he is subject to a penalty of imprisonment from one to 10 years.”