Polish President Karol Nawrocki on Thursday, February 19, 2026, vetoed a flagship government-backed bill aimed at reforming the National Council of the Judiciary (Krajowa Rada Sądownictwa – KRS), delivering a significant setback to Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s coalition and its long-promised overhaul of Poland’s judicial system.
In a strongly worded statement accompanying the veto, President Nawrocki rejected the legislation on constitutional and institutional grounds, arguing that it would destabilize the judiciary and pave the way for renewed political interference in the courts.
“I cannot sign a law which, under the slogan of restoring the rule of law, in fact introduces a new stage of chaos and opens the way to political influence over judges,” Nawrocki declared. He further contended that the bill would create “segregation of judges” by dividing them into categories of “new” and “old” appointees, violating the principle of judicial equality and potentially casting doubt on the validity of millions of court rulings issued in recent years.
The vetoed legislation, passed by the Sejm (lower house) in late January 2026 with the support of the ruling Civic Coalition (KO), Third Way, and The Left alliance, sought to fundamentally restructure the KRS—the constitutional body responsible for nominating judges and safeguarding judicial independence. Key provisions included:
Changing the method of electing KRS members to give greater weight to judges chosen by their peers rather than parliament.
Introducing mechanisms to review and potentially annul judicial appointments made under the previous Law and Justice (PiS) government between 2015 and 2023.
Establishing new procedures for assessing the professional and ethical suitability of sitting judges.
The Tusk government has consistently argued that these reforms are essential to reverse what Brussels and domestic critics describe as the politicization and capture of the judiciary under PiS rule. Restoring judicial independence is also a central condition for unlocking approximately €137 billion in frozen EU funds withheld since 2021 over rule-of-law concerns.
President Nawrocki, however, dismissed the government’s rationale. He insisted that judges appointed under previous procedures cannot be retroactively delegitimized. “In the Polish legal order, there are no ‘neo’ or ‘paleo’ judges,” he stated, using shorthand terms commonly applied to post-2017 appointees (“neo-judges”) versus those selected before PiS reforms (“paleo-judges”).
He further emphasized that the constitution grants the president exclusive authority to appoint judges upon KRS recommendation, and that this prerogative cannot be subjected to review or reversal by the government or justice minister. Justice Minister Waldemar Zurek, a vocal critic of the PiS-era changes, has been a particular target of Nawrocki’s ire; the president recently referred to him in a television interview as a “legal terrorist.”
The veto highlights the continuing institutional deadlock between the pro-EU government coalition and the conservative president, who was elected in 2025 with strong backing from PiS-aligned voters and remains closely aligned with the former ruling camp. Under Poland’s constitution, overriding a presidential veto requires a three-fifths (60%) majority in the Sejm—currently out of reach for the governing coalition, which holds a narrow majority but falls short of the supermajority threshold.
The ruling coalition has vowed to explore alternative legislative pathways, including possible constitutional amendments or referrals to the Constitutional Tribunal (whose composition remains contested). Prime Minister Tusk’s office issued a measured response Thursday afternoon, stating that the government “respects the constitutional prerogative of the president” while reaffirming its commitment to “restoring the rule of law and ending the judicial chaos inherited from the previous administration.”
The veto has drawn sharp reactions across the political spectrum. PiS leader Jarosław Kaczyński praised Nawrocki for “defending judicial independence against political revenge.” Conversely, KO chairman Donald Tusk accused the president of “protecting the legacy of captured courts” and obstructing Poland’s return to European democratic standards.
The European Commission, which has repeatedly criticized Poland’s judicial reforms since 2017, welcomed the government’s legislative effort but refrained from immediate comment on the veto. EU officials have indicated that disbursement of recovery funds remains conditional on verifiable progress toward restoring judicial independence, including changes to the KRS nomination process.
Analysts note that the veto prolongs uncertainty over Poland’s rule-of-law trajectory at a time when the country is seeking to fully reintegrate into the EU’s legal and financial framework. With parliamentary arithmetic making an override unlikely, the standoff between the Tusk government and President Nawrocki is expected to continue dominating Polish politics in the coming months.
The fate of the KRS reform now shifts to potential new legislative drafts, constitutional court challenges, and ongoing negotiations with Brussels. For the time being, the institutional tensions that have defined Polish politics since 2015 show no sign of abating.
