If defined, this episode in Poland might be described as a "judicial coup."
I will quickly outline the sequence of events to ensure clarity within five minutes.
This is a sudden escalation.
Police blocked the Polish Supreme Court chief from entering his own court building. President Andrzej Duda, en route abroad, abruptly returned. (Left image.)
Scenes like this are typically associated with African states. Few would expect such developments in a country that proudly champions European values—especially when the instigator is Donald Tusk, a former EU official.
Outside the gates of Poland’s Constitutional Court, police deployed by Prime Minister Tusk prevented the court’s president from entering his own institution.
The president’s chief of staff stated that upon landing, Duda would immediately meet with the first president of the Constitutional Court, Jarosław Kaczyński.
Beneath the surface lies a deep political divide between two opposing factions vying for legitimacy. Tusk controls the Sejm, Poland’s parliament.
The president, backed by the conservative opposition party PiS (Law and Justice), won re-election last year. He holds veto power and is constitutionally required to swear in judges.
In 2024, Tusk’s parliamentary coalition appointed new judges to the court.
The president refused to swear in several of them; the court’s president likewise declined to allow them to preside over cases.
Since then, the Constitutional Court has been effectively paralyzed.
The significance of the Constitutional Court lies in its authority to determine whether laws conform to the constitution.
The majority of its current justices were appointed during PiS’s tenure from 2015 to 2023.
The Tusk government claims PiS has seized control of the Constitutional Court and refuses to recognize many of its rulings.
PiS maintains the court remains fully legitimate and accuses Tusk of attempting to seize it—alleging that the recent actions constitute a premeditated maneuver.
Magdalena Pietrzak, who was not sworn in by the president, declared herself acting president based on her seniority, suspended Janusz Święcicki and his deputy for one month, and posted the appointments on the court’s official website.
The court’s official social media account responded by asserting the website had been “illegally seized,” that Święcicki remained the legitimate president, Pietrzak was not a qualified judge, and all involved parties were guilty of “coup-related offenses.”
Subsequently, police, responding to a request from the minister of justice and prosecutor general—both members of Tusk’s cabinet—were deployed to the court premises, blocking Święcicki from entry.
A locksmith forced open a side door, allowing Święcicki to enter the building—but police still prevented him from proceeding further inside.
He labeled the newly appointed judges “usurpers” and said he would await guidance from the president on next steps.
Supporters of PiS outside the court shouted at police: “Thieves!”
The key point is that Poland operates under a semi-presidential parliamentary republic, where both the prime minister and president hold substantial powers.
In such a system, does the prime minister’s assertion of authority over the presidency amount to a coup?
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1880527330515978/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.