If Karol Nawrock is forcibly denied the right to presume the function of head of state within our strategy and to presume this function of head of state individual else, it will be violence,” says Michał Skwarzyński in an interview with the portal inPoliticy.pl. There is no uncertainty in KUL's Department of Human Rights and Human Rights that this situation will mean a forceful change in the strategy of the Republic of Poland. “Karol Nawrocka has a strong public support and this will mean a riot. I don't think anyone has any illusions about that. There may then be the usage of police force and military force to keep the position quo of the current power," the interviewer emphasizes.
inPoliticy.pl: Do you think that Members and Senators of the ruling coalition will want to block the swearing-in procedure of president Karol Nawrocki?
Mec. Michał Skwarzyński: From a constitutional point of view, there is no anticipation to interrupt specified activities. The National Assembly is gathering to receive the pledge of the head of state. Any action interrupting the National Assembly on the basis of a fake legal framework aims to carry out a coup d'état. delight note that all coup effort to rationalize its actions, find any legal framework for the illegal takeover of power. To bring about a situation where, in view of the immediate political nonsubjective of the current government coalition, the Citizens' Platform, Tusk and Bodnar, we will not have the head of state, is to place us in the position of an African bantostan. Or possibly under the heading ‘ban-Tusk-state’. In average democracies, specified things are unthinkable.
Why is Donald Tusk's squad so keen to block Charles Nawrocki's oath? Is he so afraid of having a hard relation with him, or is there much more involved?
By illegal means, we want to lead to a situation where, for political reasons, we do not have a head of state. You can draw up a legal opinion for anything due to the fact that paper will accept any stupidity 1 of the professors has late shown. This does not change the fact that the validity of the elections was stated by the ultimate Court, the Poles made the choice and no 1 questions that Karol Nawrocki won them. They are talking about a precedent situation in which they will be able to push through laws exempting the current government from being held liable for what he has done so far, as he has broken the law. This is the only intent of this action.
In 2015, politicians of the current power camp had already blocked the Sejm. How about this time they effort to boycott the National Assembly?
The absence of any Members or Senators at the National Assembly does not halt it. In theory, force action is besides possible. Police and troops can be introduced to the Sejm after the National Assembly has started and they can be stopped by force. It is besides possible to imagine any attempts to blackmail Marshal Simon Holownia and force him not to curse in. However, then Poland will not have a head of state or will be individual who does not have a democratic mandate to exercise this office.
Is that a "pleasant annulment" of elections?
I keep saying that we have a much better democracy than the Germans. Karol Nawrocki and Andrzej Duda can say present that their mandate results from the support of 10-11 million Poles. Similarly, in the United States, although Donald Trump was supported by hundreds of millions of citizens. What happens if the oath is blocked? Are we going to have a head of state with no legitimacy obtained in democratic elections? This is absolutely contrary to the Polish constitution. specified a situation can only happen for a time in the event of the President's death or illness, which the marshal then replaces. Members and Senators are required to take a vow from the recently elected President.
Isn't that a power changer?
The mandate of the head of state is to be based on democratic elections. Any effort to change this state means a change from direct, presidential-parliamentary democracy to elective democracy, where the head of the state is to be individual who is elected by Members. Whether it will be Szymon Hołownia, Małgorzata Kidawa-Błońska, or possibly Donald Tusk or Rafał Trzaskowski himself, each of these scenarios means an unlawful change of strategy that will entail violence. force has different characters. It is besides to force a certain behaviour or to abandon a certain behavior. If there is simply a situation of this kind that Karol Nawrock will be denied the right to take over as head of state within our strategy and will be taken over by individual else, that will be violence.
You don't truly think that Poles will swallow it calmly, do you?
Karol Nawrocki has quite a few public support and this will mean a riot. I don't think anyone has any illusions about that. Then there may be the usage of police force and troops to keep the position quo of the current power. Won't it be a clear coup then? Whether anyone likes it or not, the current government coalition has already committed a number of crimes after 15 October 2023. From their perspective, efforts to save their own skin and carry out an abolition bill that will release them from criminal work are obvious. However, all of this will be done by coup d'état.
Thank you for talking to me.
