A top court in Poland has ruled that lawmakers are prohibited from questioning the country’s central bank chief, adding another layer of complexity to the ongoing power struggle between the current government and supporters of the previous administration. This decision, delivered on Tuesday, sets the stage for a new clash between the two sides.
Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s pro-European coalition, which took power in December, has pledged to restore democratic standards that were allegedly eroded during the preceding eight years of nationalist rule. However, allies of the previous government, still holding positions of power, have actively resisted these efforts, slowing down the coalition’s progress and casting doubt on its ability to fully achieve its reform goals.
The conflict stems from accusations levied against Adam Glapinski, the central bank governor. The Constitutional responsibility committee in parliament is scheduled to begin analyzing a motion in September to bring Glapinski before a state tribunal. This committee, aiming to interrogate Glapinski, cites accusations of a lack of independence from the previous government, violation of rules prohibiting central bank financing of government borrowing, and misleading the finance ministry about the bank’s financial results. Glapinski has dismissed these allegations as unfounded.
The Law and Justice (PiS) lawmakers, who brought the case before the Constitutional Tribunal, argue that the parliamentary committee’s role in examining the motion against Glapinski contradicts constitutional guarantees of the central bank’s independence. The Tribunal agreed with this argument, stating that subjecting the central bank to parliamentary control would violate its autonomy. Krystyna Pawlowicz, the rapporteur of the case, emphasized that the same principle should apply to the heads of the Supreme Audit Office and the Broadcasting Council.
However, Tusk’s government asserts that the Constitutional Tribunal itself was politicized under the PiS rule and requires reform. The government claims that the court’s verdicts lack legitimacy due to this politicization. The prime minister’s office has not yet responded to requests for comment regarding the court’s recent ruling.
