As Poland gears up for its 2025 presidential election, the country’s two dominant parties have unveiled their candidates, signaling divergent strategies in a pivotal race. The ruling Civic Coalition (KO) is placing its bet on Rafał Trzaskowski, the mayor of Warsaw and a familiar face in Polish politics. Trzaskowski, a liberal leader, garnered significant support in the 2020 election, securing over 10 million votes but ultimately falling short by a narrow margin of 400,000 votes to incumbent Andrzej Duda.
This time, the right-wing Law and Justice (PiS) party has taken an unconventional route by selecting Karol Nawrocki, a "citizen candidate" with no previous leadership role within the party. This move appears to reflect a strategic distancing from PiS’s own record during its eight years in power. Miłosz Motyka, Deputy Minister of Climate and Environment, interpreted the decision as a tacit acknowledgment of PiS’s tarnished legacy. “If this were truly a government that Poles evaluated positively”, Motyka observed, “they would nominate a candidate closely associated with their previous governance”.
The stark contrast between the candidates underscores the ideological battle shaping the nation’s future. Trzaskowski represents continuity and a progressive vision for Poland, while PiS's choice suggests an effort to reinvent itself and appeal to a broader electorate. They seem to be targeting two broad categories – those that want someone not connected to the current political establishment, some sort of an anti-system independent – and the far right.
An ex-boxer with far right and organized crime connections
Karol Nawrocki, a historian born in 1983, has emerged as one of Poland’s most polarizing public figures. Though not an official member of the ruling Law and Justice (PiS) party, Nawrocki’s career and actions align him closely with its far-right ideology. Since his appointment as director of the Museum of the Second World War in Gdańsk in 2017, his tenure has been marked by controversy and significant shifts in historical narratives.
Under Nawrocki’s leadership, the museum underwent sweeping changes, including revisions to its permanent exhibition. These modifications, critics claim, skew historical events to portray Poles as heroic victims while downplaying uncomfortable truths, such as Polish complicity in the Jedwabne pogrom and other wartime atrocities. Dismissals of original curators led to legal battles, with a labor court in 2019 ruling against Nawrocki for unlawful termination of their contracts. The court found these actions violated artistic integrity, as the exhibition was considered a cohesive creative work.
Nawrocki’s personal connections have also drawn scrutiny. Allegations surfaced regarding his relationships with figures from Poland's far-right and criminal underworld, including Patryk "Big Boo" Masiak, a convicted kidnapper and former gang member. Nawrocki defended their acquaintance, citing shared interests in boxing and portraying Masiak as a reformed individual.
A leaked report sent to PiS lawmakers further implicates Nawrocki in associations with neo-Nazi elements and organized crime. These allegations describe ties to figures like Olgierd L., a convicted pimp, and Grzegorz H., a known neo-Nazi affiliated with the international group Blood and Honour. Both individuals have connections to the outlaw motorcycle gang Bad Company, notorious for its violent and criminal activities.
Nawrocki’s candidacy for the presidency has heightened tensions within PiS and among Poland’s broader right-wing factions. Political observers speculate his selection aims to counteract the Confederation of Freedom and Independence, a rival far-right coalition gaining traction among younger, male voters. “Nawrocki’s appeal to this demographic may be a strategic move to weaken the Confederation’s momentum”, suggests Prof. Rafał Chwedoruk of the University of Warsaw.
A charged domestic competition and the risk of Russian interference
The stakes could not be higher as Poland prepares for its 2025 presidential election. A victory for Nawrocki would signify PiS’s return to consolidated power and set the stage for early parliamentary elections, potentially reviving Jarosław Kaczyński’s embattled camp. Conversely, a win for Trzaskowski could seal PiS’s decline and mark a triumphant resurgence for the Civic Coalition (KO) under Donald Tusk.
Public opinion polls indicate a neck-and-neck race, with both candidates polling above 30 percent. This fierce battle extends beyond mere governance – it is a struggle for political survival. Observers predict the campaign will be one of the most contentious in Polish history, driven not by policy debate but by emotional appeals to voters.
Adding to the tension, geopolitical concerns loom large. As security takes precedence over democracy and rule of law in the public’s mind, external interference from actors like Russia becomes a significant threat. Analysts fear such tactics could exploit the polarized climate, further destabilizing trust in state institutions. The discussion mirrors concerns raised in Romania and other countries about the vulnerabilities of the democratic systems to Russian influence.
Poland has already experienced the disruptive potential of digital meddling. Before the 2023 parliamentary elections, Russian hackers infiltrated messaging systems and digital billboards, disseminating crude propaganda urging support for PiS. The breaches remain unresolved, with perpetrators unidentified, underscoring the vulnerabilities in Poland’s electoral infrastructure.
Leaked reports also suggest broader manipulations, including efforts reminiscent of those used in Romania. French newspaper Le Monde recently revealed that FA Agency, a company linked to disinformation campaigns, operates from Warsaw, not South Africa as it claims. Such revelations highlight Poland’s exposure to sophisticated hybrid warfare tactics designed not to elect specific candidates but to foment chaos.
As Poland braces for this high-stakes election, ensuring the integrity of its democratic processes will require unprecedented vigilance. Controlling the internet and telecommunications landscape to counteract disinformation remains a daunting challenge, but it is one that Polish authorities cannot afford to ignore.
Poland’s political fractures and the need to reform the system
Poland’s presidential election has reignited a national debate over the scope of presidential powers in a political system that pairs a broad public mandate with limited authority.
The Polish presidency holds significant symbolic weight, bolstered by its nationwide election process. Recent polling indicates that 65% of Poles would participate in the upcoming election, with nearly 47% declaring “definite” intent to vote. Such figures give the president a public mandate rivaling the entire Sejm (parliament) and far exceeding that of any individual lawmaker.
Yet, critics argue this mandate is misaligned with the president’s actual powers. As a largely ceremonial figure, the president’s influence is restricted to vetoing legislation and issuing pardons. The executive branch, dominated by the government, wields far greater authority, leaving the president unable to significantly shape policy.
This imbalance, coupled with deep political divisions, often leads to dysfunction when the president and parliament represent opposing camps. Cooperation across party lines becomes improbable, exacerbating polarization. Historian Prof. Andrzej Nowak, an advocate for Karol Nawrocki’s candidacy, attributes this discord to a historical inability among Poles to prioritize the national good over partisan conflict. “We consider it much more important to harm our internal enemy than to cooperate even to a minimal extent for the common good”, Nowak remarks, pointing to centuries of political infighting as evidence.
In response, political scientists and constitutional experts propose two potential solutions:
A Stronger Presidency: Modeled on France, this system would grant the president broader powers, including authority over the executive branch, even when parliament holds a majority from an opposing party.
Alternatively, a chancellor system, akin to Germany, would make the prime minister the de facto executive leader. The president would be elected by parliament and serve as a largely symbolic figure.
Both proposals aim to reduce the friction between Poland’s political institutions, though neither is without drawbacks. Advocates for reform contend that the current system’s vulnerabilities—highlighted by potential Kremlin meddling and domestic partisanship—necessitate serious debate.
Remarkably, the discussion has transcended ideological lines, driven by fears of external interference and internal dysfunction. Just months ago, such a bipartisan conversation would have been unthinkable. As Poland approaches a critical juncture in its democratic evolution, the debate over the presidency’s role underscores the need for systemic changes to safeguard its political future.
