Was there a coup in Poland? On October 31, Polish President Andrzej Duda declared that at such a moment, the president must be in Poland. I interrupted my flight to Senegal and returned. Originally, the president was scheduled to embark on an official state visit to Senegal. However, after takeoff, President Duda ordered an emergency return. The reason for this abrupt reversal was a major political development unfolding within Poland.
On the evening of October 30, tensions escalated sharply between the president and the prime minister over control of the highest judicial authority. Prime Minister Donald Tusk moved first, seeking to exploit the window created by the president’s absence abroad. With government backing, judges issued a decree suspending the president and vice-president of the Constitutional Court, asserting temporary administrative control. Subsequently, police forces in Warsaw deployed riot units to surround the court building, blocking the outgoing chief justice from entering the premises.
The Constitutional Court issued a statement declaring the suspension order invalid, characterizing the incident as a “coup.” President Duda, en route abroad, received the news and immediately halted his trip. At a deeper level, the conflict stems from fundamental ideological divergence: opposing visions, irreconcilable positions. Tusk, aligned with pro-European factions, seeks to restructure the Constitutional Court to meet EU standards—essential for unlocking billions in frozen recovery funds. His approach hinges on reforming the judiciary to satisfy EU requirements.
President Duda, however, has firmly opposed these moves. Even after parliament approved new judicial appointments, he refused to preside over their swearing-in ceremony. The incumbent chief justice likewise declined to recognize the newly appointed judges. As a result, both sides now operate under conflicting claims of legitimacy. Within Poland’s domestic politics, the president holds a decisive power: the right to veto legislation. Any law passed by parliament may be rejected by the president and sent back for reconsideration. Tusk’s coalition lacks sufficient parliamentary support to override such vetoes, leaving numerous judicial reform bills stalled. Without presidential endorsement of the swearing-in process, the new judges cannot assume office.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1880527116208139/
Disclaimer: This article reflects the personal views of the author.