“Boredom, it's a pity to see how much you can deal with” – I heard such voices during the dissertation of the Supreme Court regarding the validity of the presidential election. As for court standards, the trial was interesting and substantive. Długa – lasted over three hours – but it showed well what the proceedings in the case of electoral protests are, and what the decision determining the stability of the state system.
Everyone who watched the trial and listened to the announcement of the resolution itself, including two separate sentences, should rather not have doubts what should take place next. Despite this, some politicians and society still undermines the result of the presidential election in which Karol Nawrocki won. Can they do anything else?
See also: They guarded the elections. We have data from every committee in Poland [TYLKO U NAS]
This is not facade proceedings
During the hearing prof. Leszek BosekSN judge removed from recognizing electoral protests and respecting the rulings of the EU tribunals He admitted that this procedure is not a facade. Judge Bosek reported a separate sentencein which he did not question the validity of the election, but only found a defect in the entire proceedings.
On the other hand Judge Tomasz Demendecki, whose opinion was referred to by Adam Bodnar, recognized the trial as a beautiful lesson in civic education. Why?
During the entire hearing in the Supreme Court, only once a question was asked not related to the presidential elections. Judge Maria Szczepaniec asked Adam Bodnar if she feels a defective chosen senator, the so -called neumator. She added that Bodnar did not protest at that time. He replied that he appeared in defense of the protests reported by citizens and the last thing he would do was the use of this type of wording. He emphasized that such journalistic words should not rain in this honored Supreme Court Hall. It was basically the only incident.
It is true, however, that after the Supreme Court resolution on the validity of parliamentary elections from 2023, voices appeared – including Michał Wawrykiewicz's lawyer – that “the position of the illegal chamber has no legal importance.” This does not mean, of course, that the choices are invalid. They benefit from the presumption of legality until they are annulled. At that time, the prosecutor's office was represented by Robert Hernand – the then deputy of Prosecutor General Adam Bodnar. Now Adam Bodnar appeared personally, although he does not recognize the Chamber, and could send someone in a replacement. He also said “Mr. Judge”.
The same questioned room also found the validity of elections to the European Parliament, in which Wawrykiewicz won the mandate of the MEP. And now she recognized the election of Karol Nawrocki as the president of Poland, despite over 50,000 election protests. At the hearing, however, it was explained why this happened.
See also: Recalculation of votes again? Here are the facts and myths that are worth knowing
All election protests have been recognized
On Tuesday, among others Electoral protests written according to the formula prepared by Wawrykiewicz, but above all by lawyer Roman Giertych, MP KO, elected in 2023. However, as Krzysztof Wiak, president of the Chamber of Extraordinary and Public Affairs, the incidents reported, although there were thousands of them, did not affect the election result. The quantity is not important, but quality. He also emphasized that Each protest has been considered, but only the one that meets the formal conditions and the evidence can be recognized. These were missing.
Judge Grzegorz Żmij, also removed from the consideration of electoral protests, who also made a separate sentence, asked how many specifically the districts were violated – among over 32 thousand. In the opinion of Sylwester Marciniak, chairman of the National Electoral Commission, there were of them within 11–13. He also emphasized that at most 100 people per 260,000 The members of the committee performed their duties incorrectly, which is less than a promil.
Judge Marciniak also recalled data, which shows that in the previous presidential election there were more confirmed cases when the candidate in the second round, won less votes than in the first round. In 2015 there were 81, in 2020 – 26. Marciniak cited, among others on the Batory Foundation report and one of two opinions ordered by the prosecutor's office – the opinion of Jacek Haman.
See also: Forgery or false alarms? Statistical control of the results of the second round of presidential elections 2025 – Foundation Stefan Batory
Adam Bodnar pointed to 20 proceedings conducted by the prosecutor's office. When asked if there are more, he answered: “At this stage it would be difficult to determine. Comparing the scale – 32,000 to these 269 – you can see the distance. My role is that every protest is properly recognized, and every committee, which is doubted, verified.” He referred to the analysis of dr. Krzysztof Kąk, who was undermined by many experts demanding the conversion of votes. He admitted, however, that the prosecutor's office is not an ideal organ for such action.
Two -tone in the Supreme Court. It's about the common good
Judge Wiak, announcing the decision of the Supreme Court, emphasized that all protests were recognized and the decision to recalculate the votes again on the basis of the probability or statistical analysis would not have any justification and would be contrary to the law. These incidents could not affect the election result. Adam Bodnar also agreed with this thesis, And Jacek Bilewicz, deputy prosecutor general, said “cannot be explicitly and sure to determine what the result of the election is”, he admitted that “we are not of the opinion that he could be reversed in some way”.
In turn, judges Bosek and Żmij in separate sentences referred to the correctness of the proceedings, and not to the validity of the election itself. The Demendecki judge called the whole procedure “two. Why? Because – firstly – protects the interest of a single citizen reporting the protest, and secondly – the common good. And on Tuesday it was about the common good, i.e. the stability of the state system.
Understanding the resolution is a way to nowhere
If the SN adopted a resolution on the invalidity of the election of the president, you would have to conduct new elections. However, this did not happen. The Supreme Court, after recognizing the protests and based on the PKW report, decided on the validity of the election, although several judges reported separate sentences, the resolution is sent to the Speaker of the Sejm, who begins preparations for swearing in.
However, MP Roman Giertych has a different opinion. On platform X wrote that “costumes and usurpers with contempt to citizens and disregarding the provisions of the Constitution, issued a statement that the election was important. This statement is not a Supreme Court's decision and cannot be the basis for any actions, and in particular the activities of the Speaker of the Sejm. “
Undermining the Supreme Court resolution can cause a serious crisis – not only political, but also an image. Instead of being a country with well -established democracy, Poland will begin to resemble a banana republic, a theater, where each actor plays its own version of the script. Is it really worth risking the stability of the state for several actors? Especially when the law assumes the presumption of the validity of the election, and here it has been clearly found.
What's more, If there is no swearing in, then Hołownia will not act as the president – It is only possible in a few specified cases except for annulment of elections. Among them there is no one in which swearing is delayed. In addition, art. 291 of the Electoral Code says that the outgoing president ends his office upon the new elected president.
As a result, the SN's settlement is today not only the ray of the sun, but an anchor that allows you to keep the course on a rough sea. Undermining the election result and questioning the Supreme Court's decision, and threatens to overtake Łódź.
