The results of the first circular of presidential elections brought surprise to many observers of the political scene. Szymon Hołownia, leader of Poland 2050 and talker of the Sejm, only finished sixth with a score of 4.8% according to exit poll Ipsos (or 4.7% in the OGB survey for tv Republic). This is far below the expectations of his environment and a clear signal for the 3rd Way coalition.
Election results: Holovnia in the shadow of Trzaskowski and Nawrocki
According to the exit poll poll Ipsos poll, conducted for TVP, TVN and Polsat, the order of candidates is as follows:
- Rafał Trzaskowski (KO) – 30.8%
- Karol Nawrocki (PiS) – 29.1%
- Sławomir Mentzen (Confederation) – 15.4%
- Grzegorz Braun (Confederation) – 6.2%
- Adrian Zandberg (Left) – 5.2%
- Simon Holovnia (Third Way) – 4.8%
OGB version for tv Republic shows minimal differences, but keeps Holovnia out of the top five.
In his speech after the announcement of the results, Holovnia acknowledged that the consequence is ‘yellow card’ for its formation. – Over 60% of the votes were won by candidates associated with camps who criticise the actions of our coalition – he noted. – As the 3rd Road, we paid with our dreams for being in this coalition, for being in this government. – he added.
Despite disappointment, the leader of Poland 2050 does not lose hope: – I believe the results will change. Our results will definitely emergence and I'm willing to bet on it with you all. He declared.
What went wrong? Analysis of the defeat of Holownia
Experts point to respective key factors that have decided on the mediocre result of the talker of the Sejm:
- Competition in the centre – Holovnia lost the fight for average electorate to Rafał Trzaskowski, who dominated this part of the political scene.
- Criticism of the coalition with KO and PSL – part of the 3rd Way voters may have felt disappointed by an alliance with larger parties, which weakened Holownia's unique image as a “new” policy.
- The increasing popularity of the far right – Mentzen and Braun's success shows that part of the electorate moves towards extremist demands.
- No clear message – compared to more polarized candidates, Hołownia failed to make a clear message that would mobilise voters.
Does the 3rd Way have a future?
The key is how the coalition responds to these results. If we can't rebuild the voter's trust, it could happen. weakened position of Holownia in government and within his own group.
Summary
In this case, it should be stressed that the presidential elections disagree importantly from the parliamentary elections, both in terms of procedure and legal effects. 1 of the key differences is the deficiency of a presumption of validity of presidential elections, which, unlike parliamentary elections, must be approved by the ultimate Court (Article 129(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland).
In accordance with Article 129(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland:
“The validity of the president of the Republic’s election is stated by the ultimate Court.”
This work is presently being exercised by the Chamber of Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs of the ultimate Court. In view of the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (e.g. Case C-585/18, C-624/18 and C-625/18) and of the European Court of Human Rights (e.g. Case C-585/18), and of the European Court of Human Rights (e.g. Case C-585/18), Reczkowicz p. Poland, complaint No 43447/19), it is indicated that this Chamber does not meet the standards of an independent and impartial court established by the Act. It includes persons appointed with gross violations of the regulation of law and constitutional procedures, including the engagement of a body called "neo-KRS", whose legality has been undermined by many judgments of national and global courts.
Therefore, regardless of the result of the second circular of the presidential election – regardless of whether candidate A or candidate B win – a major legal problem arises. The question of the legality of the body liable for the determination of the validity of the elections may lead to a situation where the ruling of the ultimate Court is not deemed to have been given by a court established in accordance with the law. Consequently, this may prevent the elected president from taking office effectively, as Article 130 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland states that the president shall take office after taking his oath to the National Assembly, which requires prior determination of the validity of the election.
Such a situation could lead to serious constitutional chaos and destabilisation of state bodies. In utmost cases, it can be utilized by policy makers to introduce extraordinary constitutional measures specified as emergency or even martial law (based on Articles 229 to 234 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland), which poses a serious hazard to the legal order and democratic strategy of the state.
Continued here:
Hołównia comments on its low score: “We paid to be in the coalition”
