Poland’s Democratic Deadlock

Civil Society, Democracy, Economy & Trade, Europe, Featured, Gender, Headlines, Human Rights, Migration & Refugees, Press Freedom, TerraViva United Nations

Opinion

Credit: Kacper Pempel/Reuters via Gallo Images

MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay, Jun 25 2025 (IPS) – Poland’s embattled Prime Minister Donald Tusk emerged bruised but still standing after his government survived a parliamentary vote of confidence on 11 June. He’d called the vote, which he won by 243 to 210, just days after the presidential candidate of his Civic Platform (PO) party suffered an unexpected defeat.


Karol Nawrocki, an independent nationalist conservative backed by the former ruling Law and Justice Party (PiS) defeated liberal pro-European Union (EU) Warsaw Mayor Rafał Trzaskowski in a nail-biting presidential runoff. The result offers a broader test of Poland’s democratic resilience that could have implications across the EU.

The electoral blow

Nawrocki’s path to victory was anything but predictable. The 42-year-old former president of Poland’s Institute of National Remembrance had never held elected office before emerging as PiS’s chosen candidate. Yet his populist message resonated with frustrated voters.

Economic grievances provided fertile ground for nationalist appeals. Despite Poland’s relatively low unemployment, youth unemployment of over 10 per cent is an understandable source of anxiety for younger voters. Increasingly, they’re reacting by rejecting mainstream political offerings.

This helped cause the fragmented results of the 18 May first round. Trzaskowski won only 31.36 per cent of the vote and Nawrocki took 29.54 per cent. The combined vote share of right-wing candidates – Nawrocki and far-right politicians Grzegorz Braun and Sławomir Mentzen – exceeded polling expectations. Braun and Mentzen took over 21 per cent between them, thanks to the support of many young voters.

The 1 June runoff saw Nawrocki win 50.89 per cent to Trzaskowski’s 49.11 per cent, a margin of under two percentage points. Nawrocki took 64 per cent of the rural vote while Trzaskowski commanded 67 per cent in urban centres – an established geographic divide that reflects an enduring ideological division between a conservative, nationalist Poland and its liberal, cosmopolitan counterpart.

Election interference

Disinformation is helping fuel polarisation. The election campaign unfolded against a backdrop of foreign interference concerns that echoed troubling developments across the region – particularly in Romania, where the Supreme Court cancelled the 2024 presidential election due to evidence of Russian interference.

Just days before the first round, Poland’s Research and Academic Computer Network discovered evidence of potentially foreign-funded Facebook ads targeting all major candidates. According to an investigation by fact-checking organisation Demagog, TikTok was flooded with disinformation, particularly but not exclusively against Trzaskowski. The platform’s algorithm displayed far-right content twice as often as centrist or left-wing content to new users, with pro-Nawrocki videos appearing four times more frequently than pro-Trzaskowski content. Over 1,200 fake accounts systematically attacked Trzaskowski, while another 1,200 promoted Nawrocki.

The influence operation extended beyond individual character assassination to sowing distrust in the democratic process and sharing broader far-right narratives. Fake accounts systematically promoted anti-Ukrainian sentiment and anti-immigration conspiracy theories.

Donald Trump also gave Nawrocki an unprecedented level of support: he received him at the White House just before the election and sent his Homeland Security Secretary to campaign for him in Poland as she attended the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). This year, CPAC, a US conservative platform, held two international events, in Hungary and Poland. The Polish one, timed to coincide with the runoff, offered a clear indication of how the nationalist far right has become internationalised.

Institutional paralysis

The viability of Tusk’s ideologically diverse coalition and his own political future have been called into question by the result. With critics in the Civic Coalition blaming the election defeat on the government’s communication failures and Tusk’s personal unpopularity, the confidence vote became a key test.

But even though Tusk has survived the confidence vote, it will be a tall order to implement the reforms needed to restore the democratic institutions that came under strain during the PiS administration. In eight years in power, PiS dismantled judicial independence, made public media its propaganda mouthpiece and undermined women’s rights by introducing one of Europe’s harshest anti-abortion laws. The new government’s attempts to reckon with this legacy had already been hampered by outgoing President Andrzej Duda, who used his veto power to block key reforms. Nawrocki will continue that, leaving Tusk unable to realise his promises to Polish voters and the EU.

The European Commission had counted on Tusk completing promised judicial reforms as it unlocked billions in pandemic recovery funds frozen over rule-of-law concerns during PiS rule. With progress now unlikely, the Commission faces the difficult decision of whether to maintain its funding even if the government’s unable to deliver promised changes.

Beyond the EU, Nawrocki’s foreign policy positions threaten to complicate Poland’s previously staunch backing of Ukraine. Although supportive of continued aid, Nawrocki has pledged to block any prospects of Ukraine joining NATO and prioritise Polish interests over refugee support.

High stakes

The razor-thin margin of victory in the presidential election, combined with record turnout of 72.8 per cent, tells a complex story of a divided society. While high participation suggests robust civic engagement, the deep polarisation reflected in the results reveals faultlines that extend far beyond conventional political disagreements.

The outcome offers further evidence that, when economic grievances aren’t addressed, institutional trust is allowed to erode and information environments are left vulnerable to manipulation, opportunistic politicians will exploit social divisions and anti-establishment anger.

For Poland, the coming years will test whether democratic institutions can withstand the pressures of sustained political deadlock. Poland faces potential institutional paralysis that could further erode public trust in democratic governance. Poland’s institutions will need to try to demonstrate their continuing effectiveness, and civil society and independent media will need to maintain their credibility, to help protect and nurture democratic values.

Inés M. Pousadela is CIVICUS Senior Research Specialist, co-director and writer for CIVICUS Lens and co-author of the State of Civil Society Report.

For interviews or more information, please contact research@civicus.org

  Source

How Many Developing Countries Are Forging Paths to Climate Accountability at SB62

Climate Change, Climate Change Finance, Conferences, Featured, Headlines, Sustainable Development Goals, TerraViva United Nations

Climate Change

Ongoing negotiations at Bonn, Germany, during the ongoing SB62. Credit: UNFCCC

Ongoing negotiations at Bonn, Germany, during the ongoing SB62. Credit: UNFCCC

SRINAGAR & BONN, Jun 25 2025 (IPS) – A packed conference room buzzing with the energy of over 300 national experts, negotiators, and implementers discussed their submissions of the First Biennial Transparency Reports (BTRs) during the 62nd session of the Subsidiary Body for Implementation (SB62) negotiations taking place in Bonn, Germany.


The workshop was convened as part of the ongoing SB62 under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and was being held at a crucial time for global climate governance, providing a rare and vital platform for countries to exchange honest reflections on their first forays into enhanced climate transparency.

Daniele Violetti, Senior Director at the UNFCCC, while offering a snapshot of global progress, said, “As of today, 103 Biennial Transparency Reports have been submitted, of which 67 are from developing countries, including 15 Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS).”

The reports, which were due in December last year under the Paris Agreement’s Enhanced Transparency Framework, aim to enhance transparency and build trust among parties to the UNFCCC by providing a regular update on progress towards climate goals.

He lauded the extensive support provided through the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and other agencies, noting, “We at the UNFCCC Secretariat remain fully committed to collaborating with partners and enhancing the capacity of developing countries.”

Over the past five months, the Secretariat convened 17 country support events attended by 319 national experts and 11 sub-regional and regional workshops with 373 experts from 112 developing countries. Additionally, 1,700 review experts were certified under the BTR Technical Expert Review Training Program.

“This is a meaningful and valuable learning experience under the Paris Agreement,” Violetti said, stressing the importance of “reflection and mutual learning” to build “stronger national transparency systems that will serve countries well beyond this reporting cycle.”

The workshop’s agenda moved from introductory remarks to a series of concise presentations by key implementing agencies: the Global Environment Facility (GEF), Conservation International (CI), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF).

Esteban Bermudez Forn, Climate Change Specialist from the GEF stated that the Facility has supported the preparation of 163 BTRs in 111 countries, including multiple reports from countries advancing to their second and third BTRs. “We encourage countries to see GEF support as a savings account—prepare your BTR, but also request access to ensure you have resources available when you need them,” he advised.

Highlighting  the continued availability of funds, Forn  said, “We still have USD 92 million available under the current replenishment cycle. Please, if you haven’t requested support from the GEF, do it as soon as possible before the replenishment cycle ends.”

Ricardo Urlate of Conservation International spotlighted the importance of nurturing local talent, referencing a project in Rwanda that partners the government with academia. “Normally, there is a big dependency on external experts—very expensive experts from outside—and this is something that cannot continue if countries want to be more efficient and engaged,” he warned.

Through the Evidence-Based Climate Reporting Initiative, Rwanda’s Environmental Management Authority and the African Institute of Mathematical Sciences trained over 50 staff in data analysis, climate modeling, and greenhouse gas inventories. Ricardo emphasized, “The important thing is that there are a lot of options… to identify at the country level which is the one that better fits their own needs and priorities.”

CI also highlighted a sub-regional project with the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), which aims to build capacity for enhanced transparency across member countries. “Reporting and transparency are two of the key elements they are supporting,” Ricardo said, pointing to the value of regional approaches.

FAO’s Marcel Bernhofs drew attention to a persistent challenge: finding appropriate executing agencies with the managerial capacity to lead projects. “This gap can create bottlenecks and delay implementation, slowing down the preparation and submission of funding requests,” he observed.

FAO’s approach emphasizes on-the-ground engagement, leveraging regional and national teams. Their Capacity Building Initiative for Transparency (CBIT) and Forestry and Other Land Use (FOLU) project, for example, “provides easy-to-access and knowledgeable technical experts” and focuses on supporting agriculture and land use sectors—areas that are “not easy, where we are really struggling quite a lot to do a good job,” Marcel acknowledged.

Marcel also stressed the importance of language accessibility: “Sometimes working in English is fine, but we also need, when we enter the detail and close discussion, to use the national languages.” FAO’s capacity-building activities, including a recent forest monitoring course in three languages, supported 2,500 participants from 141 countries.

The Value of Timely Technical Assistance

Richmond Azee from UNDP shared practical lessons on the importance of selecting the right executing partners and providing timely technical assistance. “Never let [countries] work alone on the BTRs but be ready beside them with some resources… to provide technical assistance as soon as possible and as needed to unlock some issues and overcome some challenges,” he advised.

He cited Guinea-Bissau’s experience aligning multiple reporting requirements and Niger’s successful correction of technical errors in their submission, both facilitated by UNDP’s hands-on support. “As a result, Guinea-Bissau, an LDC, submitted its BTR before December 2024… and Niger submitted on time, enhancing their understanding for the next cycle of BTRs.”

Funding Modalities and Sustainability Susanne Lecoyote, dialing in from UNEP, addressed the evolving funding modalities.

“Out of the total 111 countries that have accessed funding so far for BTRs, UNEP has supported 66,” she stated, describing how diverse modalities—such as bundled projects—help tailor support and ensure continuity for countries as they move through reporting cycles.

Susanne explained the streamlined approval process for expedited funding, typically taking just three to four months. She encouraged project coordinators to “be flexible to start preparing proposals while you are concluding your reports… do not mind about the technical review comments, because when they come in, we will provide a room for you to make amendments if needed.”

UNEP’s CBIT-GSP (Global Support Program) is a hub of collaboration, she said, “working closely with the Consultative Group of Experts, Climate Promise, Pacific Adaptation to Climate Change (PACC), Implementation and Coordination of Agricultural Research & Training (ICART) and many other initiatives to make sure that transparency-related services are provided to all countries, irrespective of whether they are supported by UNEP or other agencies.”

National Ownership and the Importance of Coordination

Rajan Dhappa from WWF shared Nepal’s experience, celebrating the country’s recent submission of its first BTR and its third Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), making Nepal the first in South Asia to do so.

“We tried our best to submit the document with the best available data and information. But BTR is a time-taking process; it requires coordination among agencies and also the technical and financial support,” he reflected.

He stressed the centrality of government ownership: “If there is a high level of ownership and if they tend to implement such projects… then every project gets a success result or every project receives its intended goal on time.”

Nepal’s work on establishing a national Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) mechanism is expected to pay dividends for future reporting.

IPS UN Bureau Report