The National Prosecutor’s Office of Poland has submitted a request to the Sejm (Polish parliament) to lift the immunity of former Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki in order to pursue legal action regarding the postal voting system in the 2020 elections.
The prosecutor’s office reported that on January 16, Attorney General Adam Bodnar sent a request to Sejm Speaker Marek Kuchciński asking for parliamentary consent to initiate criminal proceedings against MP Mateusz Morawiecki.
“Criminal prosecution of the Member of the Sejm of the Republic of Poland is possible only with prior consent from the Sejm,” the request states.
According to the prosecutor’s office, the evidence evaluation “justifies the suspicion that Member of Parliament Mateusz Morawiecki committed a crime, which involved exceeding the powers of a public official… and failing to fulfill his duties, thereby acting to the detriment of public interests and leading to unnecessary, ineffective, and unjustified expenditure of state funds amounting to at least 56,450,406.16 zlotys.”
It is important to note that the 2020 presidential elections in Poland, initially scheduled for April 10, were held during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic and strict restrictions. In those circumstances, the prime minister decided to initiate preparations for postal voting, which, in the end, did not take place. On May 7, the National Electoral Commission declared that the vote scheduled for May 10 could not be held.
The elections were held predominantly in the traditional manner on June 28 and July 12.
In 2021, Polska Poczta (Polish Post) requested compensation from the National Electoral Commission for the costs incurred due to the elections, amounting to over 70 million zlotys, but only received part of the requested amount, as the electoral commission found no legal grounds for paying the full sum. A legal battle over this issue is ongoing.
In May 2024, Morawiecki was summoned to testify before the Sejm’s investigative committee on postal voting, where he insisted that his decision to implement postal voting under those circumstances was the safest option.
