(© picture-alliance/dpa)

  Judicial reform in Poland

  6 Debates

In the conflict over Poland's controversial judicial reform many voices in other EU countries are calling for stringent measures against Warsaw. Within Poland these demands have fanned anti-European and anti-German sentiment. Pro-PiS media have for example reported that Germany financed the protests of recent weeks. Commentators look at how Berlin and Brussels are being portrayed in Poland.

At the latest since the clash over Poland's judicial reform it has become clear just how deep the divisions between the government and the opposition are. Europe's press looks at how the current political crisis in the country has been determined by events of the past.

Two days after Polish President Andrzej Duda used his veto to stop two of the three laws on judicial reform, Europe's press continues to speculate about his reasons. Some see his veto as a success for the demonstrators. For others the president is no more than a puppet on a string held by PiS party leader Jarosław Kaczyński.

In a surprise move in the row over the PiS's proposed judicial reforms, Poland's President Duda has threatened to use his power of veto. The president let it be known that he would only sign the law on the nomination of judges to Poland's Supreme Court if his amendment is accepted. The fight over the independence of the Polish judiciary enters the next round - and continues to fill the commentary sections.

Thousands of people once again demonstrated against the judicial reforms in Poland on the weekend. They hope President Duda will refuse to sign the new laws - as he himself announced he would do on Monday morning. Polish media are struck by the number of young people among the demonstrators but take widely differing views of the protest movement.

Despite all the warnings Poland's ruling PiS party is doggedly pursuing its controversial judicial reforms. The EU Commission has responded in kind and initiated another infringement proceeding. Some commentators see this as the right move to prevent further dismantling of democracy; for others this is inadmissible interference from abroad.