The appointment of Zbigniew Kapiński as the First President of the Supreme Court has triggered internal divisions within PiS, drawing sharp criticism from historian Sławomir Cenckiewicz over past judicial decisions.
Internal Dissent Over Kapiński’s Nomination
The nomination of Zbigniew Kapiński for First President of the Supreme Court has caused significant friction within the political circles associated with Law and Justice (PiS). Historian Sławomir Cenckiewicz publicly addressed President Karol Nawrocki, claiming he had committed a “terrible mistake.”
Cenckiewicz’s criticism centers on Kapiński’s role in the 2000 lustration trial of Lech Wałęsa. The historian argued that the court possessed sufficient evidence at the time to reach a different verdict. He suggested that this appointment might be perceived as a disregard for those who have long campaigned for a re-examination of that case.
Presidential Office Defends Selection Process
In response to the mounting criticism, the Presidential Office clarified that Karol Nawrocki’s decision was made independently, based primarily on the candidate’s extensive professional experience. Presidential spokesperson Rafał Leśkiewicz emphasized that Kapiński’s long-standing service in the Supreme Court and his recent tenure as head of the Criminal Chamber made him the most qualified candidate.
Officials also noted that Kapiński received the highest level of support among all candidates during the Supreme Court’s General Assembly. The administration maintains that the selection was free from political pressure and focused on restoring institutional stability.
Public Reaction and Kapiński’s Response
Polling data collected on May 27, 2026, revealed a divide in public perception, with 83.87 percent of participants expressing a generally or strongly positive view of the nomination. Negative feedback was significantly lower, totaling 7.94 percent, while 8.19 percent of respondents remained undecided. The survey recorded a total of 20,113 votes.
Following the announcement, Kapiński addressed his critics during a radio interview. He dismissed the accusations of being a “mistake” and reiterated his focus on his judicial track record. He pledged to resolve ongoing disputes surrounding state institutions and prioritized the need for efficient judicial administration upon formally assuming his duties.