The next country under our “analytical eye” is Poland, our neighboring country and a reliable geostrategic partner, especially through the lens of the full-scale war.
As in the previous post about Spain, let’s refer to the “Freedom in the World” project by the organization “Freedom House.” According to the ratings of this project, Poland was awarded 81 out of 100 possible points in 2023 by the expert group. Based on the breakdown of points for political rights and civil liberties, the country received 34 out of 40 and 47 out of 60 points, respectively. The path to Poland’s democratization began back in 1989 when the roots of democratic institutions and instruments started to take hold, marking a departure from communist rule.
The “Freedom House” rating is based on blocks of indicators that sequentially highlight issues according to which a comparative assessment of the level of democracy, and therefore freedom, is made. One of these is the issue of free and fair elections through which the head of government and the president are elected, where Poland scored 3 out of 4 points. The president of this country is elected by direct/popular vote for a term of 5 years and can be re-elected once. The appointment of the prime minister and the government involves two actors – the president, with the approval of the Sejm (the lower house of the Polish parliament). The current president of Poland, Andrzej Duda, was re-elected to his position in July 2020, receiving 51% of the electorate’s support in the second round. Voter turnout in these elections was 68.1%, the second-highest figure in the context of presidential elections since 1989.
However, 1 point (out of 4 possible) was not awarded due to the case during the presidential elections, which were to be held under the COVID-19 quarantine restrictions, where election administration was handed over to postal offices instead of the National Election Commission. As a result, the government did not fulfill its constitutional obligations, changing the election procedure. A court case was even opened, during which it was ruled that the prime minister violated the law. In 2021, the Supreme Audit Office accused high-ranking officials of trying to organize mail-in voting without legal grounds and at significant cost.
Separately, the “Freedom in the World” project highlights the analytical question of the right to form independent political parties, which can become subjects of internal systemic political competition. Polish parties are organized and operate freely, and 2019 became a turning point for the dominance of the Law and Justice party, which had significant influence over voters since 2015. However, due to an insufficient percentage of parliamentary mandates, they lost control of the Senate, the upper house of the Polish parliament. In the run-up to and during the last elections and parliamentary races, a number of new small political parties emerged on Poland’s political stage, and 4 of them managed to win seats in the legislative body. This clearly demonstrates the differentiation and polarization of political forces in the country.
The political will of citizens, their safety during elections, and independence from external pressures on the political sphere are also highly rated within the “Freedom House” methodology. The project also emphasizes the presence of real protection for Poles from illegal use of physical force, armed rebellions, and war, giving it the highest score – 4 out of 4.
In fact, the aforementioned Law and Justice party is extremely controversial in terms of being labeled as a “bearer of democratic values.” However, this party has been in power for almost ten years. Although, according to observers of the parliamentary elections in Poland in October 2023, the country once again has a chance to preserve democracy as a political regime. But why is that, and what is the specificity?
In recent years, during the period when the Law and Justice party, led by 74-year-old (today) Jarosław Kaczyński, was in power, many events occurred that dragged the country into the abyss of authoritarianism. Due to populist policies and statements, particularly regarding the ban on abortions and the oppression of LGBTQ+ community members, the anti-Brussels course, strengthening legislative control, most opposition forces and Poland’s foreign partners feared that the country was close to “Polexit” – exiting the European Union. Television and radio broadcasting turned into state branches of communication, and the views of the Law and Justice party on providing humanitarian aid to Ukraine and migrants were highly condemned. Additionally, the Sejm, dominated by Kaczyński’s party members, engaged in open disputes with Israel and the U.S. over differing views on various policy decisions in Poland. However, compared to today, Poland’s scores in the “Freedom in the World” project as of the publication of this research in 2017 were even higher than the most recent data. At that time, they reached 89 out of 100 points (Poland’s scores were even higher before 2015). But this was just the relative beginning of the Law and Justice party’s policies, and therefore authoritarian instruments managed to intertwine with the democratic constructs developed since 1989 and outweigh them in practice until 2023. That’s why the current score is significantly lower.
In this context, it would be worth recalling another period of Poland’s authoritarian past. To do so, let’s delve into the details of the so-called “sanation” regime. In 1925-1926, Polish lands were engulfed in economic and political crisis. Logically, an authoritative and strong personality was expected to come to power. The respected military leader and creator of the independent Polish Republic, Józef Piłsudski, put forward his candidacy for the role of national leader. Piłsudski’s main supporters were representatives of the army and the leadership of the Polish Socialist Party. In 1926, specifically on May 12, after fierce street fighting in Warsaw, Józef Piłsudski consolidated his sole power over the territorial definition of the Republic, which was already called “sanation” at that time. The term translates literally from Polish as cleansing and revitalization of society. The first measure introduced by Piłsudski was the abolition of the presidency. Instead, he established and headed the Office of the General Inspector of the Armed Forces of Poland, independent of the parliament or government. The scope of its activities included army affairs, “restoring order” – fighting corruption and abuse of power, and controlling the limitation of multipartyism. The formal president of Poland was Professor Ignacy Mościcki, who, however, was not an independent political figure. Józef Piłsudski himself understood the philosophy of “sanation” as creating a supraclass and supraparty authority, reducing the cost of the state apparatus, and improving the situation of national minorities.
The sanation regime did not end even after the death of Józef Piłsudski, as it was led by the “colonels’ group,” who were officers of the Polish legions created by the military leader. In the 1930s, the sanation regime only intensified. All state institutions attacked citizens’ rights and freedoms, freedom of assembly was eliminated, state administration subordinated the local self-government system, and the ideology of “state upbringing” became dominant. A harsher criminal code was adopted, and in 1934 the first detention center (essentially a concentration camp) for political prisoners was established in Bereza Kartuska (Western Belarus). The significance of Polish nationalism increased. Quotas limiting places for Jewish students in universities were widely introduced, and attacks on shops owned by the Jewish national minority in Poland became almost daily occurrences. The entire philosophy of “sanation” proclaimed by Józef Piłsudski dissolved. The reaction of Poles to the worsening foreign policy situation in the late 1930s was a trend toward national consolidation, as programs were developed to unite the population around the ideas of sanation and form a mass social base. The Polish authorities saw this as a mechanism for salvation and protection against the revanchist sentiments of Germany.
Reviewing the project “Freedom in the World” database on Poland’s line, one can conclude that until 1978, the country was identified as “Not free.” This is not surprising, as the country, although nominally independent, was part of the socialist bloc and under the influence of the USSR. The starting point of political transition began in the early 1980s, initiated by the events of Polish workers’ protests and followed by the spread of activities of the independent trade union “Solidarity,” founded and led by Lech Wałęsa. Since then, Poland has been marked as “Partly free,” and the 1990s marked its full level of freedom with the designation “Free.”
Thus, we can see that Poland is an example of a democratic state where the political regime still fluctuates in the continuum of “autocracy-democracy.” The success of democratic transformation lies in the activation of social movements and interaction with other democratically-oriented countries. However, even after developing a stable model for implementing democratic policies, the mechanisms of power have been influenced by political forces that position themselves as authoritarian through shadowy approaches: and the Law and Justice party is a vivid example of this. Although intuitively, Poland is expected to experience growth in the level of freedom and democracy in the future.
This publication was prepared with the financial support of the European Union under the “Erasmus+ Program” in the direction of “Jean Monnet for Higher Education” (Module “Political Institutions and Systems in Europe: Comparison and Experience for Ukraine,” No. 101126702).
