Prosecution Drops “Coup” Investigation into Hołownia’s Presidential Inauguration Claims

Prosecutors have dismissed allegations of a proposed “coup d’état” regarding the potential presidential inauguration of Karol Nawrocki, concluding that no criminal offense occurred and no pressure was applied to the Speaker.

The “Coup” Allegations Dismissed

Prosecutors confirmed that during the hearing of the Speaker of the Sejm, Szymon Hołownia, it was established that no proposals, suggestions, or pressure had been directed toward him. The inquiry was closed due to a lack of criminal intent.

In July, Hołownia claimed on Polsat News that he had been repeatedly urged to delay the inauguration of Karol Nawrocki to effectively stage a “coup d’état.” He attributed these suggestions to individuals dissatisfied with the presidential election results.

Official statements clarify that Hołownia’s televised remarks referred to media discussions of various political scenarios rather than direct threats. The investigation noted that leaders of the ruling coalition were firmly opposed to blocking the inauguration, characterizing it as unconstitutional.

Legal analysis concluded that discussions regarding the Speaker assuming duties after Andrzej Duda’s term ends did not constitute incitement to a crime, nor did they represent preparation for the violent removal of a constitutional body.

Legality of Revoking Parliamentary Mandates

The prosecutor’s office also found no evidence of criminal activity regarding the revocation of the parliamentary mandates of Maciej Wąsik and Mariusz Kamiński. The Speaker acted in accordance with the final and binding court rulings from December 2023.

The prosecution argued that the Speaker, as an executive authority, possesses no power to verify or override court judgments. Consequently, he was duty-bound to enforce the legal consequences of the convictions handed down against the two former officials.

Regarding the events of February 7, 2024, when Wąsik and Kamiński attempted to enter the Sejm, the prosecution stated that the Speaker was within his rights to order the Parliamentary Guard to block their entry. Given they no longer held valid parliamentary credentials, maintaining order was a formal duty.

The office further stated that rulings issued by the Constitutional Tribunal that exceeded its procedural competencies held no significance for the criminal assessment of these actions.