When Donald Tusk’s government came to power in Poland two years ago, it faced the ambitious task of reversing a decade-long political takeover of the judiciary by the nationalist, conservative Law and Justice party (PiS). PiS had entrenched its influence over key judicial institutions by appointing loyal judges, punishing critics, and reshaping the Constitutional Tribunal to delay government initiatives. European courts condemned these changes, and Polish citizens experienced legal uncertainty, but efforts to restore independence were blocked by successive PiS-aligned presidents.
Poland’s political landscape has been deeply polarised for over a decade, with urban, pro-EU voters supporting Tusk and conservative, post-socialist voters favouring PiS. Tusk’s first justice minister, Adam Bodnar, was removed due to slow progress in undoing PiS reforms. His successor, Waldemar Zurek, took a more confrontational approach, pursuing investigations against former PiS officials, including former Justice Minister Zbigniew Ziobro, accused of misusing state funds for political surveillance. Zurek has publicly stated his readiness to face personal risks, including imprisonment, in defense of democratic principles.
Restoring judicial independence requires passing legislation approved by the president. Initially, Tusk’s ministers had to cohabit with PiS-aligned President Andrzej Duda, limiting progress. Bodnar focused on reestablishing the autonomy of the National Council of the Judiciary (KRS) and the Constitutional Tribunal, and removing PiS-appointed court presidents, while joining the European Public Prosecutor’s office to enhance accountability. However, Bodnar’s cautious, legalistic approach was deemed insufficient by Tusk, leading to Zurek’s appointment.
After the election of a PiS-supported president, Nawrocki, in June, legislative reforms face strong resistance. Nawrocki has indicated he will not nominate judges opposing PiS changes, forcing Tusk’s government to pursue accountability through prosecutions and transparency measures. Legal experts note that even without convictions, exposing past abuses helps inform voters and reinforces democratic accountability.
The recent struggle highlights persistent challenges in Poland’s judiciary, including inefficiency, delays, and political interference, which undermine public trust. Experts emphasize that safeguarding democracy requires systemic reforms, reducing political polarization, and educating society about the rule of law. Civic engagement initiatives, such as outreach by independent judges during PiS rule, demonstrate the importance of connecting legal reforms to public understanding.
Ultimately, Poland’s experience illustrates that restoring judicial independence is not only a legal challenge but also a societal one. Rebuilding trust in institutions demands persistent efforts to balance legal reform, public awareness, and political negotiation, ensuring that democracy and the rule of law can withstand partisan pressures and polarization.
