Poland’s ruling coalition has endured a tumultuous 100th day of President Andrzej Nawrocki’s term, as the president’s vetoes and controversial appointments threaten to deepen political divisions ahead of next year’s parliamentary elections.
Vetoes and Judicial Appointments Spark Friction
On the 100th day of Andrzej Nawrocki’s presidency, he has vetoed 11 laws—many from the ruling coalition—and intervened in appointments of ambassadors, special‑service officers, and judges. These actions have intensified disputes over the scope of presidential authority, including the veto of a wind‑energy bill and the refusal to cooperate with charge d’affaires Bogdan Klich in Washington.
Critics Accuse President of Confrontation
Polish opposition figures, such as former education minister Dariusz Wieczorek, argue that the president, who did not win an outright mandate, should unite Poles rather than “feed the Polish‑Polish war.” They highlighted his refusal to promote judicial and intelligence officials as a deliberate provocation, calling it a “stick in a hive.”
Veto on New National Park Fuels Party Tension
President Nawrocki also vetoed legislation establishing the Lower Oder Valley National Park, citing potential “blockage of regional economic development.” The move was criticized as an unnecessary imposition on a project supported by widespread public and parliamentary backing, showing a sharp stance against what many see as routine policy.
Election Outlook Intensifies Coalition Strain
With parliamentary elections slated for 2027, coalition leaders warn that the current conflicts risk unseating Donald Tusk’s party. Speculation grows that Nawrocki’s confrontational approach may ultimately cost the ruling majority the confidence of voters and the ability to govern effectively.
Opposition Predicts Backfire on President’s Brakes
Moderate voices within the opposition, including Paweł Śliz, predict that Nawrocki’s role as a political brake will backfire, weakening the coalition’s position and costing Tusk’s movement dearly. They warn that the president’s vetoes could unintentionally catalyze an electoral shift against the current government.
