Article written for the Civic Space Watch by Agapi Antonaki, European Civic Forum, on 07/08/2024.
Border security measures and relations with Belarus
Poland’s response to the influx of migrants from Belarus has been multifaceted, involving both security measures and border restrictions since the border became a hotspot in 2021. As documented in our Civic Space Report 2023, there are serious concerns about the previous governments handling of the crisis at the Polish-Belarusian border, including the documented deaths of 30 migrants and the disappearance of 195 others, while CSOs had to provide aid without government support.
On 29 May 2024, Prime Minister Donald Tusk said that Poland planned to reimpose a 200-metre buffer zone at the Belarus border, after a clash between a Polish soldier and migrants on 28 May at Poland’s northeast border. After being taken to a military hospital in Warsaw, the soldier died on 6 June. On 3 June, Minister of the Interior and Administration Czesław Mroczek announced the introduction of a 90-day ban (as of 4 June) on entering certain border areas, which was adopted by the Council of Ministers. The regulation which introduces the buffer zone was published on 12 June. The ministry stated that measures have been implemented to prevent the illegal smuggling of migrants and to ensure the safety of police, border guards, and soldiers who are patrolling the area.
The new buffer zone, covering a smaller area than a similar ban imposed during September 2021, includes 27 villages along the border with Belarus. Violation of the ban can result in either arrest or a fine. Belarus has denied allegations that it assists in channelling migrants to the Polish border. Tusk emphasised that the situation at the border is not about asylum seekers but rather a coordinated effort to destabilise Poland.
While this measure includes several exemptions — such as for permanent residents, their immediate family members, property owners, individuals attending to official duties, religious activities, medical treatments, and emergency services. However, the majority of local businesses, especially in tourism and hospitality, are not eligible for compensation for losses due to the restrictions.
Humanitarian aid organisations operating at the Polish-Belarusian border have criticised the Polish government’s consultations on the new buffer zone, calling them a façade due to their superficial and poorly timed nature. Despite a draft regulation, the buffer zone lacks formal approval and implementation details. Concerns include the zone’s legality, potential constitutional issues, and restricted CSO and media access, which could hinder humanitarian aid. The organisations called for a legal review of the buffer zone, proper regulation of access, and ongoing evaluation to prevent abuses. They highlighted the need for detailed regulations on the Polish Army’s conduct towards civilians and the importance of ensuring migrants’ safety and access to humanitarian aid. In a letter sent to Minister Maciej Duszczyk, aid organisations criticised the consultation process for its lack of depth, transparency, and inclusiveness, urging more comprehensive and open public consultations.
Lastly, Poland plans to strengthen its border security, and Defence Minister Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz mentioned they will increase the number of troops at the border with Belarus, without further specification.
Emergency contraception programme
The implementation of an emergency contraception programme, which is piloting since 1 May 2024, aims to improve access to reproductive healthcare services in Poland. However, only 850 out of 11,500 pharmacies have signed up for this and the sale of the “morning after” pill. This limited participation of pharmacies in the programme raises questions amongst activists and pharmacists about its effectiveness and reach. Nevertheless, applications for the pilot programme are still open.
The Polish government’s decision to implement this emergency contraceptive program involving pharmacists prescribing the pill was significantly influenced by President Andrzej Duda’s veto. The veto blocked the bill that would have allowed over-the-counter access to the morning-after pill for individuals aged 15 and above. President Duda justified his decision by citing several concerns, including the need to respect Constitutional rights, the importance of protecting children’s health, and the role of parental involvement in minors’ health decisions. Left senator Magdalena Biejat criticised the decision as harmful, arguing that young girls should have access to emergency contraception, just like adult women, since they can also become pregnant. Deputy education minister Katarzyna Lubnauer expressed disappointment, stating that the president was “yet again against Polish women”.
During the implementation of the emergency contraception programme, the National Health Fund published a map of pharmacies which prescribe the “morning after” pill to patients over 15 years old. However, activists of the initiative “Abortion without borders” (Aborcja bez granic) noted that this does not guarantee women’s safety. The Abortion Dream Team (Aborcyjny Dream Team) emphasised that it creates significant barriers.
In addition, ensuring widespread availability of emergency contraception, especially in rural and underserved areas, is crucial to addressing reproductive health needs. Moreover, concerns over minors’ access to contraception and the need for comprehensive sexual education programs underscore the broader challenges in reproductive healthcare policy.
Closure of Article 7 procedure:
The European Commission (EC) decided to close the Article 7 (1) procedure against Poland, which was invoked in 2017. Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union (EU) provides ways for the EU to respond when there is a risk of a serious breach of EU values or when such a risk has already taken place. Specifically, Article 7 (1) refers to the case in which the European Council has identified a clear risk of a breach of democratic values, human rights and/or the rule of law, and decides to take preventive measures. This procedure was invoked after the Law and Justice (PiS) government amended the Law on the National Judicial Council (NCJ), changing its composition so that judges were selected by the parliament instead of the judicial community, increasing the risk of political interference in judicial appointments. Additionally, in 2017 a new Disciplinary Chamber was established in the Supreme Court to review cases against judges, which led to arbitrary disciplinary procedures aimed at intimidating judges who criticised government reforms.
On 6 May 2024, the EC finalised its analysis on the rule of law situation in Poland in context of this procedure and announced its decision to halt it on 29 May 2024. “Today marks an important day for the rule of law in Poland and in the European Union. After more than six years, following the positive steps taken by the Polish authorities as well as the strong support expressed by Member States in that respect, we have now closed the Article 7 procedure for Poland. We will continue engaging with the Polish authorities to support them in their endeavour to promote the rule of law,” the Vice-President and Commissioner for Values and Transparency, Věra Jourová, said.
EC’s premature decision is based on the government’s commitments to undertake reforms, although only a few measures have been implemented. In December 2023, a resolution was approved by Poland’s parliament (Sejm) to make changes in the National Council of the Judiciary (NCJ), as the new government aims to reverse the previous administration’s reforms, which critics claim politicised the judiciary. The European Union supported Poland’s plan to restore the rule of law and reverse policies from the previous PiS government that froze billions in EU funds due to judicial independence concerns.
The Venice Commission has repeatedly expressed concerns that the amendments undermine judicial independence, as well as the rights to freedom of expression and association for judges; they have also indicated that further reforms are needed for Poland to comply with the European standards for the rule of law. Human Rights Watch highlighted its concerns about potential favouritism and the risk of politicising the process. Moreover, concerns extend beyond Poland to other member states, particularly Hungary, where similar issues regarding the rule of law and democratic principles persist, emphasising the need for a cohesive approach.