DOCSLIB.ORG

Poland Beyond Solidarity: Defining New Priorities for Polish Domestic and Foreign Policy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Poland Beyond Solidarity: Defining New Priorities for Polish Domestic and Foreign Policy Poland Beyond Solidarity: Defining New Priorities for Polish Domestic and Foreign Policy A report reflecting the views of the Network 20/20 delegation to Poland November 2005 By Joanna Gwozdziowski with George Billard and Ion Nemerenco Additional contributors Brigitte Rajacic, Amit Vemuri and Michel Zaleski Edited by Richard M. Murphy POLAND BEYOND SOLIDARITY: DEFINING NEW PRIORITIES FOR POLISH DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN POLICY A Network 20/20 initiative to reach out to our counterparts in Central Europe INTRODUCTION Seventeen years after its historic transition from communism to democracy, Poland has achieved a number of its important domestic and foreign policy goals, including the creation of a civil society and market economy, and membership in both the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union (EU). At the same time, having accomplished these goals, Poland now faces the question of what’s next: what will be its priorities for the domestic challenges that the country faces, what role will it play within the European community, and what will be the nature of bilateral relations with the United States. With these issues in mind, in November 2005 a Network 20/20 delegation went to Poland seeking answers to three different questions: 1) With the recent Polish parliamentary and presidential elections, what will be the domestic priorities of the new government? 2) What economic policies will the government pursue in order to address the fiscal challenges that Poland faces? 3) What will be the government’s approach towards foreign policy, including relations with the US, NATO and the EU, and its eastern neighbors, including Russia? After an intensive week of meetings in Warsaw and Krakow with senior government officials, business leaders, parliamentarians, academics, and representatives from foundations and the non-profit world, the Network 20/20 delegation reached certain preliminary conclusions. 2 MAIN FINDINGS Poland believes that it is a loyal and reliable partner of the United States and wants to strengthen what it considers to be a strategic partnership with the US. Polish officials emphasized that Poland has historically looked to the US as the leader of the democratic world and America can, therefore, count on Polish support in the future. There is a long history of US support for Polish democracy, including during the Solidarity movement of the 1980s, and there continues to be a reservoir of good feelings between the two nations. A 2005 Pew Research poll, for example, cited Poland as one of only four nations whose population expresses favorable feelings towards America. The one issue where this is not the case is the war in Iraq. Poland’s involvement in Iraq has created a disconnect between the Polish public and the government, with 70% of the population opposed to the conflict, according to the Polish Institute of Public Affairs. Throughout our discussions, Polish officials expressed their desire for a strategic partnership with the US. They argued that Poland can offer more than just assistance in Iraq. In addition to serving as a bridge with the EU, and providing guidance on US policies towards Poland’s eastern neighbors, Polish leaders stressed that the close US- Polish relationship enables them to offer frank advice on how the US should respond to international crises. The new Polish government is likely to continue the same foreign and defense policies of its predecessors. Both the foreign and defense ministers are likely to follow Poland’s traditional policy since 1989 of cultivating strong ties with the US, pursuing military and economic integration within Europe, and remaining cautious in relations with Russia. The current Foreign Minister, Stefan Meller, was associated with Solidarity and is a professional diplomat and academic, having served as Ambassador to France, and most recently, Russia. The current Defense Minister, Radek Sikorski, is Western-educated, was also associated with Solidarity, has served previously as deputy Defense Minister, and has ties to the Bush Administration. Our Polish interlocutors emphasized that Poland will continue its attempts to define its role within NATO and the EU, and will further strengthen relations with the US. The government will face some foreign policy challenges, particularly on how to improve relations with certain members of the EU, as well as with Russia. One potential concern is whether the government will be able to execute such policies given strong Euro-skeptic and anti-Russian feelings within the governing 3 party and its allies in the Sejm, the Polish parliament. The US, therefore, should encourage and support policies by the Polish government that coincide with US national interest. It should also provide guidance or incentives in cases where the direction of Polish government policy is unclear. Poland needs to cultivate and promote its competitive economic advantages – a highly educated population, low cost labor, geographic location – and tackle effectively its challenges – excessive red tape, corruption, and a poor infrastructure. Poland is strategically situated at the center of Europe and has the largest economy of all of the former Soviet bloc countries, with a well established heavy industry base. Poland could be the assembly, warehouse, and transport hub of Eastern Europe. But after more than 15 years of pioneering free market experiments, Poland’s economy is not keeping up with many of its East European neighbors. The higher growth rates posted from 2000 to 2004 are now expected to diminish, despite an environment of increased liquidity provided by EU accession funds, stable foreign direct investment (FDI) flows, continued government spending, and a dynamic consumer services sector driven by rising incomes and improved access to credit. Moreover, high unemployment rates persist despite a continuous stream of foreign companies establishing a presence in Poland. Corruption and red tape are serious impediments to continued foreign investment as is Poland’s underdeveloped infrastructure. (See below) Poland’s new government is willing to station part of the United States anti- missile defense system on its soil, the only such base not on American territory. The US had been conducting secret basing negotiations with Poland. The new Polish government, however, prematurely made a public announcement about Poland’s willingness to base the system. This irritated Russian military leaders who stated that such a space umbrella in Central Europe would only make sense in a conflict with Russia. It is not clear what motivated this announcement, whether it was to prove Poland’s loyalty and willingness to share in US defense structures, to demonstrate to Russia that Poland is now firmly part of a Western defense system, to irritate officials in the Kremlin, or all of the above. Poland would like the United States to spend more money on the F-16 offset program. When Poland agreed to purchase F-16 aircraft from the US, Polish officials were promised that in exchange for this purchase the country would receive investment from American companies in the civilian sector, including research and development, and infrastructure. Polish officials have indicated that so far there have been many promises but little action in this regard. 4 ISSUES AND CONCERNS The minority government will have to seek alliances or a formal coalition with radical parties to help push through its agenda. A minority government was established following the Fall 2005 parliamentary elections. Two center-right parties – the Law and Justice Party (PiS) and the Civic Platform Party (PO) – had received the most votes (28% and 26% respectively), but differences between the two – mainly over economic strategies and political disagreements – prevented the anticipated formation of a coalition government. Law and Justice subsequently formed a minority government. The previous ruling party, the Democratic Left Alliance (SLD), which is descended from the former communist party, won only 11% of the vote. It lost largely because of numerous corruption scandals during its tenure and its failure to tackle Poland’s high unemployment rate of 18%. In the October presidential race of the same year, Lech Kaczynski (PiS) won 54% of the vote, beating his rival Donald Tusk (PO), who received only 46%. The Law and Justice Party drew much of its support from pensioners, lower-income voters, rural voters, and others who felt they had been under-represented in the past. Its platform urged welfare reforms, the strengthening of social benefits, curbing corruption, and the defense of Catholic and family values (the country is 90% Catholic). Law and Justice also played skillfully on the fears of voters who were skeptical about European integration and concerned that they would be hurt by further economic reforms. For example, PiS leaders have expressed skepticism about Poland’s plan to adopt the euro by the scheduled date of 2011. President Kaczynski has stated that Poland should hold a referendum on joining the euro zone despite the fact that Poland has already agreed to expedite euro-entry preparations. Civic Platform, on the other hand, was committed to the promotion of a free market economy, including the rapid adoption of the euro and the introduction of a 15% flat tax. It attracted well-educated, market-oriented urban voters who wished to enjoy the benefits of European integration and globalization. PiS decided to govern as a minority party because it was able to gain the support of two radical parties that shared parts of its domestic platform: the nationalist League of Polish Families (LPR) and the Farmers’ Self-Defense Party (Samoobrona). In May 2006 PiS entered into a formal coalition with the two parties. In the current coalition government, the LPR’s leader, Roman Giertych, is deputy prime minister in charge of education and Andrzej Lepper, the head of Samoobrona, is also a deputy prime minister whose portfolio includes agriculture and rural development. On the 5 international front, both these parties have Euro-skeptic tendencies and are staunchly anti-Russian.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej
    CENTRUM BADANIA OPINII SPOŁECZNEJ SEKRETARIAT 629 - 35 - 69, 628 - 37 - 04 UL. ŻURAWIA 4A, SKR. PT.24 OŚRODEK INFORMACJI 693 - 46 - 92, 625 - 76 - 23 00 - 503 W A R S Z A W A TELEFAX 629 - 40 - 89 INTERNET http://www.cbos.pl E-mail: [email protected] BS/158/2005 WYBORY PREZYDENCKIE: PEWNOŚĆ GŁOSOWANIA, PREFERENCJE NIEZDECYDOWANYCH I PRZEWIDYWANIA CO DO WYNIKU WYBORÓW KOMUNIKAT Z BADAŃ WARSZAWA, WRZESIEŃ 2005 PRZEDRUK MATERIAŁÓW CBOS W CAŁOŚCI LUB W CZĘŚCI ORAZ WYKORZYSTANIE DANYCH EMPIRYCZNYCH JEST DOZWOLONE WYŁĄCZNIE Z PODANIEM ŹRÓDŁA Prezentowane wyniki pochodzą z wrześniowego sondażu1 przeprowadzonego przed wyborami parlamentarnymi. Podstawowe informacje dotyczące przewidywanego udziału w wyborach prezydenckich i preferencji wyborczych były już publikowane2. Obecnie powracamy do tych danych proponując szersze ujęcie tematu. PEWNOŚĆ DECYZJI WYBORCZYCH W tym roku Polacy nie mają łatwego zadania, jeśli chodzi o podejmowanie decyzji w wyborach prezydenckich. Lista ewentualnych pretendentów do prezydentury bardzo długo pozostawała niekompletna, później ze startu w wyborach zrezygnował tracący poparcie Zbigniew Religa. Przed koniecznością zmiany decyzji wyborczej postawieni zostali zwolennicy jednego z najbardziej liczących się kandydatów - Włodzimierza Cimoszewicza, który zrezygnował z ubiegania się o najwyższy urząd w państwie. Ostatnio mówi się też, że nad wycofaniem swojej kandydatury zastanawia się Maciej Giertych, choć oficjalnie wiadomość ta nie została jeszcze potwierdzona. Zmiany w ofercie wyborczej nie sprzyjają krystalizacji i stabilności preferencji wyborczych. Trudno też oprzeć się wrażeniu, że początkowo Polacy z dużą rezerwą podchodzili do oferty wyborczej, bazującej głównie na dość często kontrowersyjnych liderach partyjnych. Przez długi czas wyborcy nie traktowali swych wyborów politycznych jako ostatecznych i niezmiennych. Stabilizacji elektoratów zapewne nie sprzyjały także zmiany w sondażowych rankingach poparcia dla kandydatów.
    [Show full text]
  • Polish Studies in Culture, Nations and Politics Edited by Joanna Kurczewska & Yasuko Shibata Vol
    polish 3()’ 187 14 sociological review ISSN 1231 – 1413 Polish Studies in Culture, Nations and Politics Edited by Joanna Kurczewska & Yasuko Shibata vol. 4 Yasuko Shibata, Discrimination for the Sake of the Nation. The Discourse of the League of Polish Families against “Others” 2001–2007 Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2013, pp. 310. ISBN 978-3-631-64132-3 (Print), E-ISBN 978-3-653-03088-4 (E-Book) Discrimination for the Sake of the Nation. The Discourse of the League of Polish Families against “Others” 2001–2007 written by Yasuko Shibata is the fourth volume of Polish Studies in Culture, Nations and Politics, a Peter Lang series that aims at publishing monographs and collections of articles dedicated to selected topics from the fields of sociology, political sciences and history. This publication is an example of the interdisciplinary Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) study, a type of the research that constitutes a very popular current in the broadly defined social sciences. It also fills the gap in the literature on the role of discriminatory and national discourses in Polish politics. Since the League of Polish Families [ Liga Polskich Rodzin (LPR)] there has been no Polish prominent political actor that would explicitly and successfully use the former category of discourse. This success, however, had its limits: LPR, the Polish far-right political party formed in April 2001 as a merger of several factions and political communities that were invoking the legacy of the National Democracy (ND), never played a key role in the Polish politics. The period between 2001 and 2007, however, was the time during which the party managed to enter twice, (2001 and 2005) the Parliament of Poland acquiring, respectively, 7,87% (36 candidates in the Sejm and 2 in the Senat) and 7,97% (34 candidates in the Sejm and 7 in the Senat) of the votes cast.
    [Show full text]
  • Women in Business Awards Luncheon at the Hotel Irvine, Where Aston Martin Americas President Laura Schwab Delivered the Keynote Address
    10.5.20 SR_WIB.qxp_Layout 1 10/2/20 12:14 PM Page 29 WOMEN IN BUSINESS NOMINEES START ON PAGE B-60 INSIDE 2019 WINNERS GO BIG IN IRVINE, LAND NEW PARTNERS, INVESTMENTS PAGE 30 PRESENTED BY DIAMOND SPONSOR PLATINUM SPONSORS GOLD SPONSOR SILVER SPONSORS 10.5.20 SR_WIB.qxp_Layout 1 10/2/20 1:36 PM Page 30 30 ORANGE COUNTY BUSINESS JOURNAL www.ocbj.com OCTOBER 5, 2020 Winning Execs Don’t Rest on Their Laurels $1B Cancer Center Underway; Military Wins; Spanish Drug Investment Orange County’s business community last year celebrated the Business Journal’s 25th annual Women in Business Awards luncheon at the Hotel Irvine, where Aston Martin Americas President Laura Schwab delivered the keynote address. The winners, selected from 200 nominees, have not been resting on their laurels, even in the era of the coronavirus. Here are updates on what the five winners have been doing. —Peter J. Brennan Avatar Partners City of Hope Shortly after Marlo Brooke won the Busi- (AR) quality assurance solution for the U.S. As president of the City of Hope Orange employees down from Duarte. Area univer- ness Journal’s award for co-founding Hunt- Navy for aircraft wiring maintenance for the County, Annette Walker is orchestrating a sities could partner with City of Hope. ington Beach-based Avatar Partners Inc., Naval Air Systems Command’s Boeing V- $1 billion project to build one of the biggest, While the larger campus near the Orange she was accepted into the Forbes Technol- 22 Osprey aircraft. and scientifically advanced, cancer research County Great Park is being built, Walker in ogy Council, an invitation-only community Then the Air Force is using Avatar’s solu- centers in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Wznowienie Posiedzenia Powołanie Sekretarzy Sekretarz Poseł Zbigniew
    str. str. TREŚĆ 102. posiedzenia Sejmu (Obrady w dniu 5 maja 2005 r.) str. str. Wznowienie posiedzenia poseł Cepil . .101 Powołanie sekretarzy poseł Ołdakowski . .101 sekretarz poseł Zbigniew Sosnowski . .63 poseł Czechowski . .102 Pierwsze czytania poselskich projektów uchwał poseł Łyżwiński . .102 w sprawie skrócenia kadencji Sejmu poseł Łyżwińska . .103 Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej – punkt 7. poseł Masłowska . .103 porządku dziennego poseł Zbigniew Nowak. .104 poseł Giertych. .63 poseł Dulias . .105 poseł Kaczyński . .67 poseł Kalemba . .105 poseł Dorn . .69 poseł Gajda . .106 poseł Tusk. .70 poseł Borczyk . .107 poseł Iwiński. .107 (Przerwa w posiedzeniu) poseł Wiśniowska . .107 Wznowienie posiedzenia poseł Namysło . .108 Punkt 7. porządku dziennego (cd.) poseł Michał Kaczmarek . .108 poseł Tusk. .70 poseł Mężydło . .109 poseł Janik . .72 poseł Napieralski . 110 poseł Rokita . .73 poseł Strąk . 111 poseł Oleksy . .76 poseł Zielonka . 111 poseł Dorn . .76 poseł Fedorowicz . 111 poseł Waldemar Pawlak . .77 poseł Ajchler. 112 poseł Borowski . .78 poseł Stachowicz . 113 poseł Lepper . .79 poseł Szczypińska. 113 poseł Kotlinowski. .81 poseł Suski . 114 poseł Janicki . .83 poseł Jankowski . 114 poseł Jagieliński . .85 poseł Markowski . 114 poseł Macierewicz . .86 poseł Oksiuta . 115 poseł Łopuszański . .87 poseł Marian Stępień . 115 poseł Barbara Blida . .88 poseł Bugaj . 116 poseł Borczyk . .88 poseł Łopuszański . 116 poseł Dulias . .89 poseł Ostrowski . 116 poseł Zbigniew Nowak. .90 poseł Czesław Cieślak . 117 poseł Szczypińska. .93 poseł Müller . 117 poseł Borczyk . .93 poseł Barbara Ciruk . 118 poseł Gabriel Janowski. .93 poseł Kaczyński . 118 poseł Dorn . .94 poseł Skutecki. 118 poseł Zbigniew Nowak. .95 poseł Łączny. 119 poseł Dorn . .95 poseł Woda . 119 poseł Joanna Senyszyn . .95 poseł Joanna Senyszyn .
    [Show full text]
  • In Annual Speeches of the Republic of Poland Ministers of Foreign Affairs After 2001
    Przegląd Strategiczny 2017, nr 10 Piotr POCHYŁY DOI : 10.14746/ps.2017.1.12 University of Zielona Góra THE CONCEPT OF “SECURITY” IN ANNUAL SPEECHES OF THE REPUBLIC OF POLAND MINISTERS OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS AFTER 2001 The purpose of the publication is to present how the concept of security has been de- fined in annual speeches of Poland’s foreign ministers after the 9/11 attacks in 2001. Research problem: the impact of the international situation on ways of ensuring Po- land’s security in the annual speeches of Polish foreign ministers. Apart from the as- pect of classically understood security, the analysis also covers modern categories of security that is economic, public, ecological, energy or food security. The temporal range is from 2001 to 2017. Following the definition in the Polish Language Diction- ary published by PWN I define “security” as “the state of non-threat” (Bezpieczeństwo, 2017). * * * Every year foreign ministers of Poland give their annual speeches – officially known as the Information of the Foreign Minister on the goals of foreign policy, in which they define priorities, characterize challenges, and present corrections to the policy. Sometimes it is just an ordinary fulfilment of the obligation, which does not provoke greater conflicts or reflections and is presented in the nearly empty hall, but since 2010, after the plane crash near Smolensk, there have been very exciting debates connected with disputes in the Parliament (speeches given by Radosław Sikorski between 2011–2014), also in connection to responsibility for state security. The speeches which were urgent responses to events in the world (Sikorski, 2014) and the ones that were given when new governments came to power: (Cimoszewicz, 2002; Meller, 2006; Sikorski, 2008; Sikorski, 2012; Waszczykowski, 2016) will be particularly relevant to the search for answers to the research problem because apart from presenting current issues the ministers were obliged to discuss four-year for- eign policy assumptions.
    [Show full text]
  • Polityk Roku 2012 W Polsce I Na Świecie
    Warszawa, grudzień 2012 BS/176/2012 POLITYK ROKU 2012 W POLSCE I NA ŚWIECIE Znak jakości przyznany CBOS przez Organizację Firm Badania Opinii i Rynku 11 stycznia 2012 roku Fundacja Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej ul. Żurawia 4a, 00-503 Warszawa e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] http://www.cbos.pl (48 22) 629 35 69 Koniec roku to okres bilansów i podsumowań, a także różnych rankingów i plebiscytów, które – w mniej lub bardziej poważny sposób – rozstrzygają, komu należy się tytuł osobowości roku w tej lub innej dziedzinie. Podobnie jak w ubiegłych latach, w grudniowym sondażu1 pytaliśmy Polaków, kto − ich zdaniem – w mijającym roku 2012 zasłużył na miano polityka roku. Respondenci sami wymieniali nazwiska kandydatów spośród znanych im polityków krajowych oraz – na tej samej zasadzie – wskazywali najbardziej zasłużonego przedstawiciela światowej sceny politycznej. POLITYK ROKU 2012 W POLSCE Pytanie otwarte, jakie zadaliśmy Polakom brzmiało: „Któremu z polskich polityków należy się, Pana(i) zdaniem, miano polityka roku 2012? Chodzi o człowieka, który najlepiej działał, zrobił najwięcej w interesie kraju, społeczeństwa, ludzi takich jak Pan(i)”. Prawie trzy piąte ankietowanych (58%) nie umiało wskazać żadnego polityka, który by na takie wyróżnienie zasłużył. Większą grupę wśród nich stanowiły osoby, które uznały, że żaden ze znanych im przedstawicieli sceny politycznej nie zasługuje na taki tytuł (odpowiedzi: „nie ma takiego”, „żaden” lub inny sposób wyrażenia negatywnej opinii – 33%). Co czwarty badany stwierdził, że żadne nazwisko nie przychodzi mu na myśl, bo nie interesuje się polityką, nie zna polityków, czy po prostu trudno mu odpowiedzieć na to pytanie. Pozostali respondenci wymienili w sumie pięćdziesiąt nazwisk polityków, z których jednak tylko siedmiu uzyskało przynajmniej po 2% głosów.
    [Show full text]
  • Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York
    Y L F M A E T Team-Fly® Drilling for Gold Drilling for Gold How Corporations Can Successfully Market to Small Businesses JOHN WARRILLOW Copyright © 2002 by John Warrillow. All rights reserved. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, (978) 750-8400, fax (978) 750-4744. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158-0012, (212) 850-6011, fax (212) 850-6008, E-Mail: [email protected]. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. If professional or advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional person should be sought. This title is also available in print as Bookz ISBN 0-471-12890-2. Some content that appears in the print version of this book may not be available in this electronic edition. For more information about Wiley products, visit our web
    [Show full text]
  • 2011 Conference Proceedings
    2011 Small Business Institute® National Conference Proceedings 2 Vol. 35, No. 1 – Winter 2011 COMPETITIVE PAPERS Stephanie Bardwell & Alan Bardwell………………………………………………………….. 6 Nonprofit Entrepreneurship: The "Q" is, Will Exempt Organizations Tread On the Toes of SMEs to Capture the Financial Literacy and Credit Consulting Niche Market? John Batchelor, Michael Harris, Shanan Gibson & Leo Simpson……………………………... 34 Comparison of Ethical Behavior: Individual Perceptions and Attitudes toward Entrepreneurs Joe Bell, Brittany Blair, Don Martin & John Hendon…………………………………………. 38 Angel Investment Tax Credits: Implementation and Effectiveness in a Sample of States Representative of Differing Geographical Areas of the United States Don Bradley III & Meghan Antoine…………………………………………………………... 51 Environmental Accounting and Reporting Benefits to Small Businesses John Cater……………………………………………………………………………………… 60 Generational Differences in Family Business Leadership; A Case Study Peggy Chaudhry & Kathryn Pertzsch………………………………………………………….. 80 Assessing the B2G Opportunities for Minority and Women Business Enterprises Ron Cook, Diane Campbell & Caroline Kelly………………………………………….…..….. 99 Caveat Emptor: The Question of Accuracy in Commercial Databases Gerald D‘Amboise & Josee Audet…………………………………………………………… 109 Comparing to Understand: An Evolving Approach and Empirical Results from the Study of SME Activities Paul Dunn & Chyi Lyi Liang…………………………………………………………………. 115 Entrepreneurship and Small Business Professors’ Reaction to Selected Entrepreneurial and Small Business
    [Show full text]
  • Druk Nr 4430 RZECZYPOSPOLITEJ POLSKIEJ IV Kadencja
    SEJM Druk nr 4430 RZECZYPOSPOLITEJ POLSKIEJ IV kadencja S P R A W O Z D AN I E KOMISJI ŚLEDCZEJ DO ZBADANIA ZARZUTU NIEPRAWIDŁOWOŚCI W NADZORZE MINISTERSTWA SKARBU PAŃSTWA NAD PRZEDSTAWICIELAMI SKARBU PAŃSTWA W SPÓŁCE PKN ORLEN S.A. ORAZ ZARZUTU WYKORZYSTANIA SŁUŻB SPECJALNYCH (D. UOP) DO NIELEGALNYCH NACISKÓW NA ORGANA WYMIARU SPRAWIEDLIWOŚCI W CELU UZYSKANIA POSTANOWIEŃ SŁUŻĄCYCH DO WYWIERANIA PRESJI NA CZŁONKÓW ZARZĄDU PKN ORLEN S.A. Sejm na 76 posiedzeniu w dniu 28 maja 2004 r. – na podstawie art. 111 Konstytucji Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej oraz art. 1 i 2 ustawy z dnia 21 stycznia 1999 r. o sejmowej komisji śledczej – powołał Komisję Śledczą do zbadania zarzutu nieprawidłowości w nadzorze Ministerstwa Skarbu Państwa nad przedstawicielami Skarbu Państwa w spółce PKN Orlen S.A. oraz zarzutu wykorzystania służb specjalnych (d. UOP) do nielegalnych nacisków na organa wymiaru sprawiedliwości w celu uzyskania postanowień służących do wywierania presji na członków Zarządu PKN Orlen S.A., która po zakończeniu pracy na 97 posiedzeniu w dniu 19 września 2005 r. w n o s i celem rozpatrzenia przez Sejm załączonego sprawozdania. Komisja – zgodnie z art. 19 b ustawy o sejmowej komisji śledczej – przedstawia zdania odrębne: 1) Posła Andrzeja Aumillera, 2) Posła Bogdana Bujaka, 3) Posła Antoniego Macierewicza, 4) Posła Zbigniewa Witaszka. Warszawa, dnia 19 września 2005 r. Przewodniczący Komisji i sprawozdawca /-/ Andrzej Aumiller Stanowisko Komisji Śledczej S T A N O W I S K O SEJMOWEJ KOMISJI ŚLEDCZEJ DO ZBADANIA ZARZUTU NIEPRAWIDŁOWOŚCI W NADZORZE MINISTERSTWA SKARBU PAŃSTWA NAD PRZEDSTAWICIELAMI SKARBU PAŃSTWA W SPÓŁCE PKN ORLEN S.A. ORAZ ZARZUTU WYKORZYSTANIA SŁUŻB SPECJALNYCH (d.
    [Show full text]
  • Program for the Issuance of Debt Instruments
    INFORMATION MEMORANDUM American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. (Incorporated in the State of New York, United States of America) American Express Bank Ltd. (Incorporated in the State of Connecticut, United States of America) American Express Credit Corporation (Incorporated in the State of Delaware, United States of America) American Express Overseas Credit Corporation Limited (Incorporated as a limited liability company under the laws of the Island of Jersey) American Express Centurion Bank (Incorporated in the State of Utah, United States of America) Program for the Issuance of Debt Instruments Application has been made to the Luxembourg Stock Exchange for debt instruments (the "Instruments") issued under the program (the "Program") described in the Information Memorandum to be listed on the Luxembourg Stock Exchange during the period of twelve months from the date of this document. Instruments may also be issued under the Program which are listed on a stock exchange other than the Luxembourg Stock Exchange. The Instruments have not been, and will not be, registered under the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act"). The Instruments will be issued only in bearer form and are subject to United States tax law requirements. The Instruments may not be offered, sold or delivered within the United States or to, or for the account or benefit of, U.S. persons, subject to certain exceptions. This Information Memorandum supersedes the previous Information Memorandum dated June 27, 2002. Any Instruments issued under the Program after the date hereof are issued subject to the provisions set out herein. This does not affect any Instrument issued prior to the date hereof.
    [Show full text]
  • Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej
    CENTRUM BADANIA OPINII SPOŁECZNEJ SEKRETARIAT 629 - 35 - 69, 628 - 37 - 04 UL. ŻURAWIA 4A, SKR. PT.24 OŚRODEK INFORMACJI 693 - 46 - 92, 625 - 76 - 23 00 - 503 W A R S Z A W A TELEFAX 629 - 40 - 89 INTERNET http://www.cbos.pl E-mail: [email protected] BS/142/2007 ZAUFANIE DO POLITYKÓW NA POCZĄTKU WRZEŚNIA KOMUNIKAT Z BADAŃ WARSZAWA, WRZESIEŃ 2007 PRZEDRUK I ROZPOWSZECHNIANIE MATERIAŁÓW CBOS W CAŁOŚCI LUB W CZĘŚCI ORAZ WYKORZYSTANIE DANYCH EMPIRYCZNYCH JEST DOZWOLONE WYŁĄCZNIE Z PODANIEM ŹRÓDŁA Koniec wakacji obfitował w wydarzenia, które radykalnie zmieniły sytuację na scenie politycznej. Po ujawnieniu tzw. afery gruntowej i przecieku dotyczącego akcji CBA w Ministerstwie Rolnictwa, pod znakiem zapytania stanęła możliwość dalszego funkcjonowania koalicji PiS–Samoobrona–LPR. Ostatecznie w połowie sierpnia Jarosław Kaczyński ogłosił koniec koalicji rządowej, usunął koalicyjnych ministrów, tworząc de facto mniejszościowy rząd PiS. Przez cały ten okres trwały spory i walka na oświadczenia między Andrzejem Lepperem i zdymisjonowanym szefem MSWiA Januszem Kaczmarkiem, z jednej strony, a ministrem sprawiedliwości Zbigniewem Ziobro z drugiej. Obaj politycy zarzucali ministrowi i kierowanej przez niego prokuraturze, a także CBA nadużywanie prawa, stosowanie nielegalnych działań oraz wykorzystywanie władzy do walki politycznej. Z kolei minister odrzucał te oskarżenia przypisując obu politykom niejasne powiązania z biznesem i udział w tzw. układzie – dotychczas rządzącym i wciąż mającym jego zdaniem wielkie wpływy w państwie. W Sejmie, który po wakacjach wznowił obrady, trwały proceduralne przepychanki i kłótnie dotyczące trybu jego samorozwiązania. Opozycyjna PO zapowiadała odwołanie niemal wszystkich ministrów w rządzie Jarosława Kaczyńskiego. Jednocześnie w parlamencie ujawniono tajne dotąd zeznania Janusza Kaczmarka dotyczące sposobu funkcjonowania wymiaru sprawiedliwości i służb specjalnych pod rządami PiS.
    [Show full text]
  • 8 Pologne Extremistes
    COESIO NET EUROPEAN COHESION AND TERRITORIES RESEARCH NETWORK EXTREMIST RIGHT IN POLAND Paper by Nikolay MARINOV Director François Bafoil CNRS – Sciences Po/CERI Collège Universitaire de Sciences Po – Campus de Dijon Polish extreme right fractions experienced a relatively unexpected short-lived period of electoral success in the beginning of the 21st century. This gain of public opinion approval lies on a superimposition of processes that were set in motion in Polish society throughout the transition period. For six years between 2001 and 2007, parties like the overtly extremist League of Polish families (LPR) and the populist left-right swinger Self-Defense (Samoobrona – SO), attracted media attention with the unpredictability of their electoral performance and controversy of the stances they were advocating, until a brief period in government for the first when a series of scandals exhausted their popularity and ballot box support withdrew to such an extent that even a promising environment consisting of an economic crisis could not help the extreme right resurrect from the little glorifying existence in oblivion. A contributing factor for their recent demise is the ascension of the populist right-wing Law and Justice party that diverted the more moderate elements of the electoral base. As the Polish extreme right is widely considered in the current political arrangement as practically defunct, it is legitimate to explore the way in which its presence contributed in shaping the political debate in post-communist Poland. The League of Polish families is a political party which traces its roots back to a neo-nazi racist movement founded in the early 1990s by the young Roman Giertych, he himself being a third generation of extreme right politician.
    [Show full text]