Finance Minister Andrzej Domanski decided to pay the budget subsidy for Law and Justice, thus ending the dispute over months about whether Jarosław Kaczyński's organization should receive full backing from the state budget.
The first tranche of funds, amounting to about PLN 3.7 million, was transferred to the PiS account in fresh hours. This decision sparked immediate reactions across the political spectrum — from enthusiasm among PiS activists, by criticism of part of the opposition, to consternation among constitutional law experts. However, the money dispute for the Law and Justice was not just a method accounting issue — it touched on fundamental issues of the regulation of law, the independency of public institutions, and the function of courts in a democratic state of law.
The background of the full case is the decision of the State Election Commission of August 2024, which rejected the accounts of the PiS Election Committee from the parliamentary run in 2023. The main charge was irregularities related to expenditure of PLN 3.6 million. This included invoices related to the activity of the Polish large task Foundation and the usage of public funds to finance campaigns outside the electoral period. The PKW decision resulted in an automatic suspension of the organization subsidy for 2024 and 2025, in accordance with the provisions of the Political organization Act.
The Law and Justice did not agree with the decision of the committee and brought an action before the ultimate Court. Importantly, it was handled by the home of Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs — a body established in the time of the Law and widely criticized by the legal community and the European Commission for its deficiency of independence. The home repealed the resolution of the PCW, declaring it unfounded. However, many experts have argued that this home has no legitimacy to identify specified cases, citing earlier judgments of the EU Court of Justice and rulings of the SN civilian Chamber that questioned the legality of this body. The PKW yet adopted the financial statements of the Law and Justice, but with the exception that this does not find the effectiveness of the ruling of the House.
In May 2025, PKW again addressed the issue of subsidies. The vote in the committee did not bring a clear result. There was a tie of 4:4 on the payment of the full amount of the subsidy, while 4 members were in favour of a reduction, against 3. On the basis of this result, the Ministry of Finance paid PiS the first tranche of the reduced subsidy — alternatively of a full of PLN 26 million per year, the organization is to receive about 15 million. According to Minister Domański, the decision was taken on the basis of the "best available legal interpretation", while at the same time arguing that the ministry operates within the limits of the applicable law and on the basis of the resolution of the constitutional body, which is PKW.
The case sparked a violent political reaction. The Law and Justice authorities have announced that they are dealing with a "political postponement" of the payment of due funds which they believe are party-owned on the basis of a ultimate Court ruling. Jarosław Kaczyński spoke at a press conference about "legal lawlessness", accusing the government of trying to destabilise the opposition by restricting its access to finance. Deputy president of PiS Mariusz Kamiński even announced a possible notification to the prosecutor about the excess of powers by the Minister of Finance. On the another hand, Confederate politicians, who frequently criticise both the Law and the ruling coalition, stated that the government should "objectively comply with the rulings of the courts" and considered the decision to reduce the subsidy as unfounded.
Government representatives presented a different position. Prime Minister Donald Tusk at 1 of the Council of Ministers' meetings pointed out that the government did not intend to interfere with the independency of constitutional institutions specified as PKW, and that the payment of funds was implemented in accordance with the applicable regulations. Minister Domański added that it is not the function of the executive authority to interpret the legality of the resolutions of the SN if there is simply a hazard that a given chamber was not established in accordance with the Constitution. At the same time, he pointed out that the Ministry of Finance did not intend to suspend the full subsidy, but simply adjusts its level to the PKW decision.
The debate on this issue besides entered academic and constitutional grounds. prof. Andrzej Zoll, erstwhile Ombudsman and justice of the Constitutional Court, publically questioned the legality of SN activities. In his assessment, the ruling of the Extraordinary Control Chamber "does not have legal effect" as the Chamber was declared illegal by global and national courts. On the another hand, prof. Marcin Matczak felt that the government was in a stalemate — on the 1 hand, he had a work to comply with national law, on the another hand, he could not ignore the fundamental principles of the regulation of law.
It is worth noting that the financial situation of political parties in Poland has been controversial for years. The budgetary subsidy strategy aims to guarantee unchangeable financing of organization activities in order to reduce their dependence on private donors. In practice, however, there have been many disputes over the explanation of the rules and the appropriateness of spending funds. The case of the Law and Justice organization is not isolated — previously akin concerns were related to the self-defense party, the Palikot Movement, and even the Civic Platform. The difference is that the current dispute is taking place in the context of a deep crisis of assurance in state institutions, with the contested legitimacy of any courts and a broad political dispute over the foundations of the system.
The financial implications of this decision are besides important. Cutting the subsidy by more than 40% is simply a serious blow to the PiS structures, especially at a time erstwhile the organization is trying to rebuild its position after losing the election. Smaller measures mean restrictions on information campaigns, simplification of employment in field offices and the request to abandon any of the planned projects. Much depends now on further decisions by the courts, as well as any legislative action by Parliament.
The full issue shows how complicated and multidimensional the seemingly method decisions concerning the state budget can be. The PiS subsidy became a test not only for the government, but besides for the full political and legal strategy in Poland. The question remains whether control mechanisms are strong adequate to prevent the usage of public funds for political purposes. At the same time, the request for a thorough improvement of the political organization financing strategy — more transparent, independent of political pressures and resistant to changing agreements of force — is becoming increasingly apparent.
