The Polish presidential elections held on June 1 resulted in a narrow victory for conservative candidate Karol Nawrocki, who secured 50.89% of the votes compared to liberal Warsaw Mayor Rafał Trzaskowski’s 49.11%. This tight margin raised immediate concerns among Trzaskowski’s camp regarding potential irregularities in the voting process. Wiola Paprocka, Trzaskowski’s chief of staff, highlighted unusual shifts in support across polling stations and announced plans to petition the National Electoral Commission (PKW) for an investigation. Her concerns included reports from four stations marked by discrepancies, prompting calls for formal electoral protests to be submitted to Poland’s Supreme Court.
One troubling case arose in Kraków, where Trzaskowski had initially led in the first round but was reportedly surpassed by Nawrocki in the runoff, according to the official tally. Local officials, including Krakow City Council chairman Jakub Kosek, claimed that mistakes were made in recording the results, suggesting that candidate totals might have been swapped in the official documentation. Deputy Prime Minister Krzysztof Gawkowski expressed his astonishment over these anomalies and voiced hope for a thorough clarification, underlining the uniqueness of such errors in the history of Polish elections.
The PKW has clarified that any electoral irregularities should formally be reported to the Supreme Court by June 16, emphasizing the court’s role in verifying district voting results in light of election protests. Miłosz Motyka, a spokesman for the Polish Peasants’ Party, stressed the necessity for careful scrutiny of vote count discrepancies, highlighting that failures in accurate recording should not be dismissed lightly. Motyka insisted on the importance of proper verification processes, arguing that any significant irregularities must be carefully addressed to ensure electoral integrity.
From the perspective of the ruling Law and Justice party, MP Radosław Fogiel described the claims of irregularities as an organized effort by the opposition to undermine Nawrocki’s victory. He warned against creating narratives of alleged electoral fraud, which he perceived as politically motivated paranoia. Fogiel articulated the need for caution, asserting that while investigating irregularities is standard procedure, the manner in which certain claims are framed could be detrimental to the political landscape, potentially fostering a myth that the outcome was illegitimately seized.
Observers from the OSCE, who monitored the elections, reported that the electoral process was executed in a professional manner and respected freedoms of expression, assembly, and association. Nonetheless, they noted media bias and campaign financing irregularities, indicating that improvements were necessary for the electoral framework in Poland. Despite the claims of improprieties, the monitors recognized that the election complied with several democratic standards.
Nawrocki’s victory margin of just 369,451 votes represents the closest electoral outcome in Poland since 1990, adding to the tension surrounding the results. The aftermath of the election reflects a national mood fraught with suspicion about the democratic process, and it suggests potential political upheaval as disputes over electoral integrity unfold. With investigations underway, the coming weeks will likely shape the political future of Poland as both sides brace for continued scrutiny and debate over the legitimacy of the election results.
