Jerzy Kwaśniewski, the president of Poland’s Ordo Iuris Institute for Legal Culture, spoke this week at the Battle for the Soul of Europe conference organized by the Mathias Corvinus Collegium (MCC) in Brussels. He exposed the influence of the EU and other foreign entities on the elections in Poland, as well as the situation that came close to a coup d’état by the governing EU-backed left-liberal coalition of Donald Tusk following the election of Karol Nawrocki. Ultimately, the crisis was resolved thanks to public opinion and the decision of Sejm Speaker—and governing-coalition member—Szymon Hołownia, who, despite persuasion and pressure, did not go so far as to refuse to swear in the newly elected President.
This resonated in Brussels the Battle for the Soul of Europe conference’s second keynote session on the following topic: Democracy Under Attack – How to Respond to Election Interference.
The European Commission talks incessantly about foreign election interference, and in December 2024, the European Parliament’s special committee on the European Democracy Shield (EUDS) was set up to produce proposals to counter foreign information manipulation, support independent media and journalists, and protect civil society. But as we have seen time and again, the EU supports media and NGOs that promote its federalist narratives and is only too happy to see parties and candidates banned from standing that offer an alternative vision.
So how can we defend democracy from the European Union’s election interference?
Below is Jerzy Kwaśniewski’s full speech this week in Brussels:
Ladies and gentlemen,
After the remarks given by my colleagues, I am optimistic. The forceful tightening of the grip on our liberties and political rights by the EU belongs to the typical category of the pre-agonal spasm of a dictatorship that has lost its grip on the souls and hearts of the people.
That’s an optimistic approach. It means that the EU’s liberal hegemony is dying before our eyes. It means that—even when confronted with all its cruel might—we may still win in free elections.
And that is precisely the topic of my remarks today, as I address the general issue of election interference through a case study of the circumstances in which the Polish presidential elections were won by the conservative side.
In some cases—such as Hungary—we are witnessing direct, blatant political interference by the European Commission in the national politics of EU Member States. A democratically elected government is targeted through double standards and through the weaponization of EU funds and EU policies.
But interference also takes more subtle forms. Sometimes it is not an aggressive attack, but a selective blindness—a refusal to acknowledge obvious violations of the rule of law when they are committed by governments favored by Brussels. A refusal to defend the democratic rights of the opposition or to safeguard media pluralism when the violators happen to be liberal forces aligned with the European establishment.
This is precisely what happened in Poland in the months preceding this year’s presidential election.
On September 10, 2024, Prime Minister Donald Tusk openly stated that he would be operating under the concept of so-called “militant democracy.” As he admitted, this concept anticipates the commission of acts that “will be incompatible or not fully compliant with the provisions of the law.”
And so, by means of militant democracy, a liberal takeover was implemented—fully, aggressively, systematically. Let me briefly outline its priorities.
First Priority: The Media
The takeover began immediately. The Minister of Culture appointed new supervisory boards of the public media, which appointed new management boards—even though statutory law vests these powers exclusively in the National Media Council. That Council was simply bypassed.
To secure this capture, public media were subsequently placed in liquidation, giving the government full and direct control, transforming state media into a political tool.
What shocked ordinary citizens was the symbolic moment during this forced takeover: the broadcasting signal of public television and radio was switched off.
This had not happened since the martial law of 1981, when the communist regime sought to crush the Solidarity movement.
At the same time, new proceedings were initiated to revoke the broadcasting licenses of conservative private media.
Second Priority: The Courts
The Ministry of Justice seized control of case-assignment procedures so that the most politically sensitive cases could be directed to the most politically aligned judges.
Presidents of courts were dismissed illegally, judicial disciplinary functions were taken over by government loyalists, and even the iron safes in the offices of the National Council of the Judiciary were physically forced open to obtain disciplinary files.
New procedures—so-called “tests of independence”—were drafted to challenge the status of more than 3,000 judges.
Third Priority: Using Criminal Justice Against the Opposition
The offices of the National Prosecutor were taken over by force. A new National Prosecutor was appointed without the statutorily required opinion of the President.
Political investigations were turned into public spectacles. Parliamentary investigative committees were created, and key prosecution witnesses delivered testimony live, without the presence of the defense and without the possibility of cross-examination.
Homes and offices of multiple politicians and NGO leaders were searched; documents, computers, and phones were seized. Some individuals—including Father Olszewski—were arrested. Even the liberal Ombudsman acknowledged the mistreatment of the priest.
A former Deputy Minister of Justice was granted political asylum in Hungary.
Fourth Priority: The Constitutional Tribunal
Three judicial appointments to the Constitutional Court were declared invalid. Entire decisions of the Tribunal were declared null and void. Since then, the government has ignored every interim order issued by the Constitutional Tribunal.
“Militant democracy” cannot function in a state with effective constitutional review.
Fifth Priority: The Supreme Court
The official Action Plan presented to the European Commission claimed that reforms would “strengthen the independence of the Supreme Court,” especially regarding the Chamber of Extraordinary Control.
But no details ever materialized, as President Duda did not accept any of the proposed statutory solutions—each of them effectively meaning a capture of the Supreme Court by the liberals.
The liberal blitzkrieg reached a stalemate at this point, because its sixth and most important priority—capturing the Office of the President—was still out of reach.
Let us stress this:
Throughout this entire process, the European Commission has provided unwavering political support to Donald Tusk’s “militant democracy.”
After months of blatant constitutional violations, the Commission declared that Poland was no longer at risk of any serious breach of the rule of law.
President von der Leyen celebrated the moment: “Today marks a new chapter for Poland.”
The goal was obvious. Le Monde reported that “the head of the European Commission showed keen interest in strengthening the Polish prime minister’s position during the presidential election.”
The constitutional violations ignored by Brussels were not ignored in Washington. Congressman Brian Mast, chairman of the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee, wrote to President von der Leyen expressing “profound alarm” over developments in Poland that threatened “the integrity of its democratic processes.”
Emboldened by Brussels’ support, Donald Tusk moved to suffocate the democratic opposition financially.
The National Electoral Commission refused public funding to Law and Justice, the largest opposition party.
Even after the Supreme Court annulled this decision, the Minister of Finance still refused to release tens of millions of euros to which PiS is legally entitled. At the same time, millions flowed to the liberals.
The election that followed was one of the most tense and unbalanced campaigns since the fall of communism.
The leading conservative candidate, Karol Nawrocki, ran without access to public funding, while public media—already placed in liquidation—served as a tool of the government.
Brussels repeatedly signaled political support for the government’s actions. Some EU figures even hinted at their preferred presidential candidate.
And when the voters chose otherwise, it was suddenly the result itself that came into question.
Some politicians even proposed delaying the inauguration. The Speaker of Parliament, Szymon Hołownia, later admitted that he was repeatedly pressured to postpone the swearing-in of President-elect Nawrocki—an action that would have temporarily transferred presidential powers to himself. Hołownia described this plan frankly as a “coup d’état.”
For many Poles, it echoed the past, when the real decisions affecting the nation were taken not in Warsaw but in communist committees in Moscow.
In this context, nobody should be surprised by President Nawrocki’s strong stance on the future of the European Union, expressed last week at Charles University in Prague.
He declared: “We advocate for the rejection of the project of EU centralization. In matters concerning our political system and the future of Europe, it is presidents, governments, and parliaments that have a true democratic mandate, obtained through free elections – not the European Commission and its subordinate institutions.”
He warned against dissolving national identities into a vague, unaccountable supranational bureaucracy dominated by a centralized EU system. Such a vision, he said, is “a utopia detached from reality.”
Finally, he rejected the simplistic and patronizing division of Europe’s political landscape into “enlightened supporters of the constantly deepening integration” on one side and “primitive populists with totalitarian tendencies” on the other.
Ladies and gentlemen,
This is the debate we must have today. The future of European democracy depends on restoring fairness, equal treatment, genuine respect for national sovereignty, and respect for democracy and the will of the people.
The path to victory is well known. It lies in affirming the very core of our civilization. It lies in a battle for the Christian soul of Europe. It lies in a battle for the soul of each and every one of us.
In his first words on election night, President Nawrocki quoted the Second Book of Chronicles: “If then my people, upon whom my name has been pronounced, humble themselves and pray, and seek my face and turn from their evil ways, I will hear them from heaven and pardon their sins and heal their land.”
We need a Europe that will be mindful of this eternal advice.
Thank you.
Source of cover photo: X.com/@MCC_Budapest
