- In reports published in June and July 2026, the European Commission’s assessment of the rule of law in Poland identified both areas of improvement and problems that remain unresolved.
- The improved perception of judicial independence was welcomed, but the Commission also noted that court proceedings were taking longer.
- A worrying development is the deterioration in perception of the independence of institutions important to doing business in Poland, such as the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection and the National Appeals Chamber.
- Insufficient financial resources and the implementation of local content policies in public procurement pose further threats to the independence of these bodies.
- Threats to media pluralism are also apparent, including those arising from local government media, state influence over the media market and Orlen’s involvement in Polska Press.
- Political party financing practices are another area of concern, particularly transparency and the consistent application of the rules.
- The authorities need to take action beyond their current proposals, which are insufficient to address the problems identified.
Every June and July, the European Commission (the Commission) publishes studies on the rule of law in individual European Union member states. The Rule of Law Report[1] and the EU Justice Scoreboard[2] show how the situation is changing in areas relevant to the functioning of the justice system, respect for the rule of law and doing business, among other things. From a Polish perspective, the main question is naturally how Poland performed in both assessments, particularly with the next parliamentary election little more than a year away.
The Judiciary
Some of the Commission’s findings will certainly be applauded by the current government, which promised during the last election campaign to improve standards in the judiciary. The Commission’s surveys show that 42% of people in Poland and 44% of businesses rate the level of judicial independence as “good” or “fairly good”. This represents a marked improvement — up by 18 and 20 percentage points respectively on the previous year — and a return towards the levels recorded in 2016.
It does not, however, mean that similarly positive changes have occurred in other areas. For proceedings before ordinary and administrative courts, the Commission notes that the time needed to resolve a case at first instance has increased. Negative trends are also visible elsewhere.
Institutions
The assessment of institutions that matter to businesses operating in Poland is particularly worrying. The share of respondents who regard the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK) as independent fell significantly, by 8 percentage points compared with the previous year. This happened despite existing safeguards for that independence, including a clearly defined term of office, restrictions on dismissal and a requirement to provide UOKiK with sufficient financial and human resources.
We have previously highlighted the importance of these safeguards[3]. Perceptions of the National Appeals Chamber deteriorated even more sharply: the share of respondents who consider it independent fell by 11 percentage points. One possible reason is insufficient funding for such bodies, which limits their ability to discharge their statutory responsibilities in full[4]. This dangerous trend may worsen in future, given the risks arising from the local content requirement in public procurement being introduced by the current government[5].
Media and Political Parties
Neither the state of Poland’s media sector nor the rules governing political party financing provides grounds for optimism, particularly in the context of next year’s parliamentary election. In the media sector, the Commission identifies numerous threats to pluralism. These include local government authorities publishing local newspapers that often compete with private publishers on unequal terms; the government’s ability to influence private television broadcasters by placing them on a list of protected entities[6]; and the presence in the media market of Orlen, a company in which the State Treasury holds a stake and which controls Polska Press.
On political party financing, the Commission points to differences in how parties comply with the applicable rules, particularly those concerning financial transparency.
Conclusion
The problems identified by the Commission will not resolve themselves. They require specific action by the authorities and, in some cases, appropriate legislative changes. The measures currently proposed and noted by the Commission in the two publications remain insufficient[7]. In other areas, the government has put forward no appropriate proposals, even though non-governmental organizations have made many sound recommendations[8].
The remaining months of this year should be used to implement changes, such as Orlen’s withdrawal from Polska Press, or at least to begin drafting legislation — including on political party financing and the Act on the Control of Certain Investments — and bring those bills before Parliament. This is all the more important because the outcome of the next election is uncertain.
References
[1] European Commission, Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Poland, 2026 Rule of Law Report, 17 July 2026.
[2] European Commission, The 2026 EU Justice Scoreboard, Luxembourg 2026.
[3] P. Oliński, Wdrażanie unijnej dyrektywy ECN+ a niezależność Prezesa UOKiK, FOR Analysis, Civil Development Forum, 30 November 2022.
[4] See P. Oliński, Niedofinansowani regulatorzy – zagrożenie dla niezależności?, FOR Communication 5/2025, Civil Development Forum, 13 March 2025.
[5] See P. Oliński, Miraż local content – w stronę dezintegracji wspólnego rynku UE, FOR Analysis 2/2026, Civil Development Forum, May 2026.
[6] P. Oliński, E. Ziędalski, TVN i Polsat na rządowej liście: ochrona bezpieczeństwa czy nadużycie prawa? [TVN and Polsat on the government’s list: protecting security or abusing the law?], FOR Communication 1/2025, 3 January 2025.
[7] For example, the proposed so-called media act, which, contrary to the Ministry of Culture and National Heritage’s original plans, will not ban local authorities from publishing newspapers.
[8] For example, T. Gąsior, A. Kobylińska, P. Wachowiec, Jak poprawić przejrzystość finansowania polityki. Propozycje zmian prawnych, Institute of Public Affairs, Warsaw 2025.