The background for Americans to best understand this story is HERE.

In the update to the attempted judicial coup d’etat carried out by globalist Prime Minister Donald Tusk last night, Polish media are now reporting the plane carrying Poland’s President Karol Nawrocki was denied landing permission as the President was urgently returning to deal with the leftist government effort.

The media are reporting that military pilots of the airplane carrying President Nawrocki refused to follow the orders from the air traffic controllers and landed the President back in Warsaw. {Source Here}

If these reports are accurate, Prime Minister Donald Tusk has no plausible deniability to distance himself from the grossly unconstitutional effort.  Calls are now being made to cancel the Parliamentary assembly and hold new elections to restabilize the government.

Marcin Przydacz – “Poland is facing a serious constitutional crisis following events at the Constitutional Tribunal in Warsaw on Friday, 30 October, and during the following night.

For those unfamiliar with the Polish legal system, the Constitutional Tribunal is an independent constitutional body responsible for reviewing the constitutionality of legislation, but it also has other very important competences concerning the constitutional status of the President of the Republic and the President of the National Bank of Poland. Its independence and the legal status of its judges are protected by the Polish Constitution.

Since this spring, Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s government has been taking steps aimed at gaining control over the Tribunal, most recently by attempting to install a former minister from his own cabinet as a new “judge” of the Tribunal. The government presents these actions as an effort to restore the rule of law. However, the methods employed raise fundamental questions about respect for the Constitution itself.

On Friday, 30 October, approximately 3,000 police officers were reportedly deployed in connection with the situation at the Constitutional Tribunal, following a notification from Anna Korwin-Piotrowska, who claimed the authority to assume the Tribunal’s leadership. Claiming that the President and Vice-President of the Tribunal were absent, she issued decisions announcing their suspension from official duties. The legal basis for these decisions is strongly disputed, including by the First President of Poland’s Supreme Court.

Zbigniew Kapiński, First President of Poland’s Supreme Court, issued an official statement strongly opposing the actions taken at the Constitutional Tribunal. His objections concerned both the involvement of the police and the legal basis for “suspending” the Tribunal’s leadership. He referred specifically to Articles 7, 10 and 173 of the Polish Constitution, which establish the principles of legality, separation of powers and judicial independence.

He also challenged the application of Article 130 of the Law on the Organisation of Ordinary Courts, arguing that it did not authorise a person without the relevant statutory powers to suspend the Constitutional Tribunal’s President and Vice-President. Kapiński warned that police powers must not be used to restrict the functioning of constitutional institutions or enforce political decisions concerning their leadership.

Professor Jacek Chlebny, President of Poland’s Supreme Administrative Court, issued a separate official statement addressing the events of 30 October. He described the police presence around the Tribunal and the obstruction of its President and Vice-President as unprecedented. He raised fundamental concerns about compliance with the principles of the rule of law and stated that constitutional boundaries had been crossed.

Prof. Chlebny also emphasised that restoring public confidence in the Constitutional Tribunal requires a political compromise, but that any action must remain within the existing legal framework and respect the Tribunal’s constitutional independence.

Serious legal objections have therefore been raised independently by the First President of the Supreme Court and the President of the Supreme Administrative Court. Their official statements provide a documented basis for examining the events and the constitutional questions they raise. This is not merely a political dispute between the government and the President of the Republic.

When police forces were deployed at the Tribunal, President Karol Nawrocki was travelling to Senegal. Immediately upon being informed of the situation, he interrupted his flight and returned to Poland. After arriving in Warsaw, he held consultations with the First President of the Supreme Court, Zbigniew Kapiński, and the Constitutional Tribunal’s President, Bogdan Święczkowski.

During the night, President Nawrocki travelled to the Constitutional Tribunal together with the First President of the Supreme Court. Despite the police presence and attempts by Anna Korwin-Piotrowska and other individuals at the entrance to physically prevent the President from entering the building, he entered the Tribunal and challenged the authority of those claiming to have assumed its leadership.

The confrontation at the entrance was physical, with individuals blocking the President’s passage. The Presidential Chancellery rejects allegations that the President was the aggressor.

President Nawrocki subsequently stated that the constitutional order of the Republic of Poland had been violated and that a constitutional state institution had been taken over by force.

He called for the withdrawal of police forces from the Tribunal’s premises and the restoration of the legal order. He also enabled the Tribunal’s lawfully serving Vice-President, Judge Bartłomiej Sochański, to enter the building and convened urgent consultations with representatives of parliamentary parties to stabilise the political situation and restore constitutional order.

Prime Minister Donald Tusk, meanwhile, defended the government’s decisive action as necessary to “restore the rule of law”. The President’s position is that restoring the rule of law cannot justify disregarding constitutional safeguards, bypassing statutory procedures or using police forces in a dispute over the leadership of an independent constitutional institution.

The European Commission, which was highly active in commenting on disputes concerning judicial independence under previous Polish governments, has so far not issued a comparable public assessment of these events. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has likewise remained silent.

The question is whether the same standards of constitutional legality, separation of powers and judicial independence will be applied to the current Polish government as were demanded of its predecessors.

The rule of law cannot depend on which political party is in power. Nor can the independence of constitutional institutions be protected by disregarding the constitutional rules that guarantee it.” {source}

Posted in Big Stupid Government, Election 2026, Military, Poland, Uncategorized
Share
more