Written by Veronika Barankovych, Paweł Gawryluk, Dominik Wereszko under the care of Jędrzej Błaszczak
Introduction
The competency dispute at the summits of power led to an unprecedented situation in the Polish abroad service. As a consequence of a permanent disagreement between the government and the president, key diplomatic missions are occupied by ‘directors’ in the rank chargé d’affairesNot by full ambassadors. In this article, we analyse the legal and political dimension of this conflict: from the arguments of the Ministry of abroad Affairs, citing a democratic mandate to conduct abroad policy, to the position of the Presidential Palace, standing in charge of constitutional prerogatives of the head of state. We are looking at the mechanics of "expiring" diplomatic missions and the consequences that this political clinic – which continues despite personnel changes – carries for the rank and effectiveness of Polish diplomacy on the global stage.
I. mechanics for replacing ambassadors with heads of post
Constitutional framework for the appointment of ambassadors
The foundation of the procedure of diplomatic nominations in Poland is simply a constitutional rule of cooperation between authorities. Although Article 146 of the Polish Constitution states that the Council of Ministers conducts abroad policy, the legislature reserved a key function for the president of the Republic of Poland. According to Article 133, it is the president who appoints and dismisses the representatives of the Republic. This means that without the signature of the head of state, this procedure cannot be effectively finalised. The government initiates the trial and identifies the candidate, but only the presidential nomination gives him the required legitimacy.
Key function of authentication letters
Authentication letters are an component which fundamentally distinguishes a full ambassador from a lower-level official. It is simply a solemn document, issued by the head of the sending State (President of the Republic of Poland) and addressed to the head of the host State. The submission of these letters is simply a critical minute – this is erstwhile the diplomatic mission begins formally in full. From now on, as to the date and hour, there is besides a number of precedents, meaning the rank and seniority of a diplomat in the diplomatic corps of a given country. The absence of credentials clearly means that the diplomat does not have a full mandate to represent the Republic at the highest state level.
Use of the regulatory gap by the MFA
The current actions of the government trust on instrumental usage of the provisions of the abroad Service Act to circumvent the President's constitutional prerogative. The Ministry of abroad Affairs, incapable to get a presidential nomination for its candidates, applies a legal structure based on title separation from functions. citing a work of work (which results from, among others, Article 39(3) of the Act), the minister calls on the ambassador-in-Office to the country and relieves him of his work to supply work. However, since the MFA does not have the power to take the title of ambassador – due to the fact that this act is under the sole competence of the president – the situation becomes dysfunctional. The titular ambassador remains in the country while the facility is headed by a lower-ranking official. This is an action to impose the facts of the average law de facto placed above the constitutional standard.
Actual differences between the ambassador and the head of the facility
The direct effect of the MFA practice is to fill diplomats in the rank chargé d’affaires. It should be made clear that this function is not equivalent to that of the Ambassador. First of all, it relates to a lower level of accreditation, because, in accordance with Article 14 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, chargé d’affaires He is accredited only to the abroad Minister, not to the head of the state. This entails limiting diplomatic access, as lowering the rank of typical automatically degrades Poland's position in relations with the country. Chargé d’affaires it usually has worse access to the host State authorities and is admitted with a smaller ceremony than the Extraordinary Ambassador and the Plenipotentiary. Consequently, this leads to a systemic decline in the rank of Polish diplomatic representation in the world.
II. 2 presidents, 1 deadlock. genesis of conflict and structural barrier in the MFA
Protection of prerogatives at the time of Andrzej Duda's presidency
The competency dispute on the Presidential Palace – the MFA from 2024 to 2025 afraid not only personalities, but systemic foundations, and in peculiar the definition of constitutional “co-operation” of authorities. Andrzej Duda consistently opposed to bringing the function of the head of state to the function of notary, which only automatically sanctiones the decisions of the government. In the President's argument, formulated, among others, in March 2024, it was clear that the deficiency of a signature under the nomination meant the deficiency of its legal effectiveness. The Presidential Palace held that the "co-operation" referred to in Article 133 of the Constitution required real reconciliation of candidatures alternatively than putting the president before the facts achieved.
The symbol of this conflict was an effort by the government to force Bogdan Klich's candidacy as ambassador to the US. Andrzej Duda's objection, justified by both deficiency of consultation and substantive reservations, was ignored by the government, leading to the sending of a candidate in lower rank. In the opinion of the Palace, the government's action by mass recalling ambassadors without the President's approval was a violation of the rule of continuity of power and an effort to unilaterally take control of diplomacy.
Continuation of the strategy line by president Karol Nawrocki
After taking office in 2025, president Karol Nawrocki maintained and even tightened the course of his predecessor. The refusal to sign nearly forty ambassadorial nominations was a clear signal that the fresh head of state does not accept the "hybrid" model of sending diplomats by the MFA.
At the same time, the Presidential Palace signals openness to the discussion of nominations, but it puts a hard condition: the preliminary approval of the head of state must necessarily precede the authoritative procedure of the candidacy. The President's Office (KPPP) calls on the MFA to return to the established tradition and procedural way that established a strict series of actions. First, a position should be agreed within 3 centres (President, Prime Minister and MFA). Only after obtaining a political consensus should a request for agrément to the host country. The next step is the acceptance of the candidate by the Sejm's abroad affairs committee, and the culmination of the full process – the signature of the credentials. In the assessment of the surroundings of president Nawrocki, only the return to this series guarantees the seriousness of the state.
In the narration of the NRP, the current activities of the government are referred to as "state's spoil" and deliberate lowering of abroad service. The conflict besides gained a fresh media dimension. The public disclosure of diplomatic correspondence by Minister Radosław Sikorski was received by experts as a violation of the principles of discretion and evidence of a deep crisis of government organization culture.
Systemic character of the head of the MFA
It is worth noting here an crucial individual and organization aspect, as this conflict did not expire with the change of the host of the Presidential Palace. The fact that Radosław Sikorski could not work out a plane of agreement with the president's next interlocutors – starting from the ministers Mieszko Pawlak and Wojciech Kolarski, to the current minister Marcin Przycz – points to a deeper, structural problem. This suggests that decision-making paralysis is not caused by variable presidential personalities, but by a confrontational policy kind and decision-making rigidity of the current MFA management.
Catalogue of allegations against government actions
Both during the word of office of Andrzej Duda and Karol Nawrocki, the Presidential Palace formulates a coherent catalogue of charges towards the government. The basic 1 is the accusation of violating the Constitution. The government, attempting to circumvent the request for a presidential signature, violates Article 133 of the Constitution, and bringing the President's function to the facade is interpreted as an effort to extra-tractively change the system.
Another argument is the destabilisation of the abroad service and the deficiency of substantive justification for changes. Mass rotations are interpreted as political cleansings, without substantive basis, as no compelling reasons for the abrupt cancellation of the group of 50 ambassadors were presented. Importantly, this decision has besides hit experts valued above political divisions. An example is the resignations of Mateusz Gniazdowski, erstwhile Deputy manager of the Centre for east Studies, or Mark Magierowski, a diplomat with unique contacts in the American Republican community.
Finally, the Presidential Palace points to the direct work of the government for the resulting paralysis. This is the cabinet of the Prime Minister, initiating the procedure without the required approval of the head of state, and in this optics, he bears full work for the current state. The president is not a "brake" but a guardian of procedures, defending the state against instrumental treatment of the law and demolition of expert capital.
III. position of the Government: A strategy of facts accomplished and primacy of execution
Democratic Mandate and State Camera Loyalty
The position of Donald Tusk's government, and especially the MFA under the direction of Radosław Sikorski, is based on the absolute primacy of Article 146 of the Constitution, which entrusts the Council of Ministers with the conduct of abroad policy. In the optics of the government, the democratic mandate obtained in the elections gives him the exclusive right to choice the staff implementing the current political vision. The President's opposition and refusal to sign nominations are not regarded as a legitimate prerogative resulting from Article 133 of the Constitution, but as a form of political sabotage and an effort to keep the influence of opposition in the structures of diplomacy. The government so considered that the request to guarantee full loyalty of the state apparatus justifies the application of non-standard legal measures.
"zombie ambassadors" and method extinction
In the executive layer, the MFA applied a precise mechanics of "technical extinction" of ambassadors, allowing it to circumvent the request of a presidential signature under the appeal file. Based on the subject of duty, the minister calls on diplomats to come to the country for an indefinite consultation, then, based on the provisions of the Labour Code and the abroad Service Act, to exempt them from their work to supply work. Thanks to this maneuver, these diplomats formally hold the title of ambassador – gaining the name in the spheres ‘zombie ambassadors’ – but they lose real perpetuity, physical access to the facility and financial gratuities. In practice, this means their full marginalisation, and titular dignity only becomes a dead evidence in personnel records.
Doctrine of the ‘site manager’ as a state of higher necessity
In order to fill the gap, the government applied the doctrine of "the manager of the facility", sending fresh diplomats in rank to replace the actually cancelled ambassadors chargé d’affaires, equipped only with introductory letters from the Minister. This is justified by the ‘state of higher necessity’ and by the ‘efficiency of the State’, arguing that, in accordance with the spirit of the Vienna Convention, a diplomatic post cannot stay without its chief. In the communicative of the government, this is simply a essential bridge solution, which, despite the formal fall in diplomatic rank, provides abroad partners with contact with people with real and current political legitimacy in Warsaw.
IV. Long-term effects of the precedent
The demolition of organization culture
The current conflict carries risks beyond the current political dispute, creating a dangerous precedent for future relations between authorities. The activities of the Ministry of abroad Affairs, consisting in replacing the constitutional request of administrative cooperation with a forte, lead to a permanent simplification in organization culture standards. If the presidential veto avoidance mechanics with ministerial instructions is established as an acceptable practice, A abroad policy constitution will become a collection of dead rules. Each next ruling team, facing opposition from the Presidential Palace, will be able to scope for the model of hybrid diplomacy developed from 2024 to 2025.
Trap of the year 2027. Diplomats with expiry date
In the shadow of the competence dispute, the professional situation of the diplomats themselves, who have agreed to include the institutions in the form of a ‘director’, takes place. In the event of a change of power following the 2027 parliamentary elections, these diplomats, from Washington to Valletta, may be immediately dismissed and their missions declared to be epidural.
Moreover, the closer the elections are, the more force will be on the MFA to legalize the position of at least part of the corps. This will most likely force the search for a compromise with the Presidential Palace, which may entail the request to sacrifice the most politically controversial figures (as in the case of Bogdan Klich, where Minister Sikorski declared the readiness of his appeal to Jack Najder to get signatures for another candidates). In this scenario, the current managers of the institutions become a bargaining chip, and their final position will depend not on the substantive work but on the result of the back door negotiations.
Risk of temporary sustainability
There is besides a legitimate concern that the state of “temporary” will become the fresh standard of Polish diplomacy. abroad partners, observing the Polish clinic, can get utilized to the fact that Warsaw is represented by officials of lower rank. Although political conduct cannot be denied weight, symbolism and protocol are of tangible importance in the planet of diplomacy. Long-term maintenance of facilities without full ambassadors can be read as a signal of interior weakness of the state. Moreover, the degradation of the prestige of the office of ambassador may in the future discourage prominent experts from undertaking diplomatic missions, since their position may be undermined by a single ministerial staff decision.
Summary: Political pragmatism against constitutional tradition
The current state of the Polish abroad service is the consequence of a deep discrimination between the constitutional explanation utilized by the Presidential Palace and the political practice of the government. Donald Tusk's office, focusing on the adjutancy and implementation of the electoral mandate, decided to redefine the existing rules for filling institutions, recognising the primacy of Article 146 of the Constitution. The mechanics of "expiring" ambassadors and replacing them with managers of the institutions allowed for the actual exchange of staff, although this was at the expense of lowering the rank of the formal representatives of the Polish Republic and active the uncertain destiny of the diplomats themselves.
This situation leads to a fixation of the model in which the position of diplomat is determined by the will of the minister alternatively than the presidential nomination. As a result, the Polish diplomacy functions in the conditions of a circumstantial makeshift, where the stableness of the mission depends on the current political situation, alternatively than on permanent systemic procedures. The resolution of this dispute will only bring future changes to the tops of power, which either sanction current practice as a fresh standard, or force a return to a model based on close cooperation between the 2 executive authorities.
