Minister of Foreign Affairs Radosław Sikorski published a bizarre post on social media today. A politician of the ruling coalition laments that the presidential veto is… too strong a tool and leads to the paralysis of the state. It is an astonishing display of hypocrisy from Donald Tusk’s camp. Not long ago, when Civic Platform (PO) was in opposition, the same people accused Andrzej Duda of using the veto power too rarely and mocked the head of state as a “pen”.

Radosław Sikorski decided today to share his peculiar reflections on the country’s system of government. The post by the head of Polish diplomacy showed just how instrumental the current authorities’ attitude toward the Constitution truly is.

On the X platform, Sikorski wrote:

“I remind you that, according to the spirit of the 1997 Constitution, the presidential veto was intended to protect the rule of law, not to be an instrument of fighting the government. In my view, it is too strong and leads to the paralysis of the state.”

This statement sounds astonishing, especially if we recall the narrative that the Civic Platform (PO) camp promoted to Poles during the eight years of United Right rule. Back then, leading politicians of today’s 13 December coalition, together with friendly media, demanded that President Andrzej Duda veto nearly every bill. When the president implemented the electoral platform on which he had run and signed laws reforming the country, the opposition derided him as a “pen” and a notary of the government. At that time, the veto was, for them, the pinnacle of democracy and the “protection of the rule of law”. Today, when Karol Nawrocki highlights the failures of Donald Tusk’s government and exercises his constitutional powers to block – in his view – harmful changes, it suddenly turns out that this prerogative is “too strong”.

It is worth reminding Radosław Sikorski that the 1997 Constitution, whose spirit he invokes, was adopted at a time when left-wing and liberal circles dominated the political scene. It was those authors of the Constitution who set the threshold for overriding a veto at 3/5 of votes – a requirement that forces the governing majority to seek broad compromise rather than impose its will by force.

The current government does not have such a majority, hence – as we can see – the frustration of the Foreign Minister. Instead of seeking dialogue with the Presidential Palace, coalition politicians prefer to attack the very foundations of the constitutional system, which become inconvenient for them the moment they lose absolute control.

Internet users quickly reacted to Sikorski’s post. One user aptly noted under the minister’s entry: “Every presidential veto is supported by a justification.” Apparently, however, substantive arguments hold little meaning for the current government when the President of the Republic stands in the way of their political “steamroller”.

“That’s what it’s for. Indeed, it has now become a form of resisting the government, which is trying to push through a series of harmful regulations. It does not lead to the paralysis of the state – it clearly protects it.”

“A moment ago you complained that there was no veto. Now there’s too much of it. Make up your minds.”

“It’s very good that he vetoes, because the government would drown us all with their smuggled-in proposals. Someone has to keep them in check. And you should remember that most of the bills have been signed so far.”

“We can see that it works perfectly.”

“Fortunately, no one cares about your opinion, you anti-Polish scumbag.”