An independent Polish news portal has revealed evidence that a local official nominated by an agency controlled by the coalition government led by Prime Minister Donald Tusk awarded flood relief funds to her own family and neighbours, despite the fact that they had not been affected by the flood waters that hit southwestern Poland in September 2024.
Wirtualna Polska (WP) on August 10 reported that 4.5 million złoty (€1.06 million) in flood relief distributed by the Karkonosze Regional Development Agency (KARR), the local agency responsible for flood relief funds, went to three companies from the same village, Dziwiszów in the Jeżów Sudecki municipality.
WP said four independent sources indicated that the three had not suffered flood damage.
One of the companies belongs to the husband of KARR vice-president and Civic Coalition (KO) activist Anna Konieczyńska, who took the post on February 1, 2025, another to her neighbour, and the third to the owner of a local television station that supports KO-dominated local authorities in the area.
The guesthouse company owned by her husband, Amarcord, received the maximum ministerial loan of 200,000 złoty (€47,000), while the neighbours’ firm, Kadalore, received 3.2 million złoty (€751,000) across two loans.
According to WP‘s findings, data from the State Fire Service, the water authority Wody Polskie and satellite systems raise doubts as to whether the properties for which the aid was granted were actually flooded. Of the total, 4.32 million złoty (€1.01 million) was awarded after Konieczyńska joined the agency’s board.
KARR is controlled by the Lower Silesia regional government , which holds 99.99 per cent of its shares and has been under the control of Tusk’s ruling coalition since 2024.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk on August 11 vowed tough action after reports that millions in flood-relief funds may have gone to businesses that suffered no damage, promising that any abuse of aid intended for victims of the September 2024 floods would be investigated and punished.
“With a hot iron we will burn out every case of dishonest allocation of money intended for flood victims,” he said.
“Such things are so obviously unacceptable,” he added.
Tusk also said the government had anticipated the risk of irregularities because of the scale and speed at which emergency assistance had to be distributed.
“The question is always about the scale and the response of the State,” he said. “For me, the most important thing is that state institutions work and that sooner or later every possible abuse is identified and punished.”
Tusk said 8 billion złoty (€1.88 billion) had been granted in flood assistance across 2024 and 2025, including 62,000 rapid payments to individuals and thousands of decisions concerning businesses.
The investigative journalist responsible for the story, Szymon Jadczak, has since drawn attention to the role of deputy development and technology minister Michał Jaros, who also heads KO’s regional structures in Lower Silesia. Jadczak reported that Jaros had known for months about irregularities at the agency distributing the money, and that the Central Anti-Corruption Bureau (CBA) had been conducting checks at KARR since April 29.
Jadczak said the case reached the wider public only when WP published, four months after the CBA began work. “Four months after the CBA started examining this matter, it was not the services that told the public what actually happened. It was us, the journalists,” he said.
The agency’s supervisory board dismissed Konieczyńska on August 11, the day after the story broke. Its president, Hubert Papaj, who denies that Konieczyńska took part in the decision to award the 200,000 złoty loan, remains in post.
Following WP‘s report Konieczyńska was suspended from her rights as a member of the Civic Coalition and referred to the party’s internal disciplinary court. She has described the reporting as a “typically political witch-hunt”.
The opposition Law and Justice (PiS) has asked the CBA to establish who assessed applications for financial assistance, what documentation was used and whether relevant records have been secured.
PiS parliamentarians also carried out an inspection at the Ministry of the Interior and Administration on August 10, seeking information about the government’s handling of reconstruction and assistance, and in particular about the actions of Marcin Kierwiński, the government plenipotentiary for flood reconstruction. They announced a similar inspection at the Ministry of Economic Development and Technology.
The prosecutor’s office in Jelenia Góra opened preliminary proceedings of its own motion on August 10.
The reports about irregularities in the distribution of flood relief funding were preceded in 2024 by revelations about the alleged misuse of post-pandemic funding by the Tusk government, with reports of cronyism and nepotism in their distribution together with questionable spending on luxury items in a project supporting the recovery of the hospitality sector.
In 2026 the government has already suffered from allegations about serious mismanagement within the public health service, including doctors earning large sums for hours they had not actually worked and preferential treatment handed out to KO officials and their family members.
Tusk’s promises of tough action and justice for any perpetrators of abuse have been undermined by both the public view of the judicial system and the performance of the prosecutors with regard to pursuing allegations against members of Tusk’s ruling party.
While former PiS government officials have been pursued with parliamentary immunity lifted and even pre-trial detention, prosecutors have been far more restrained with regard to allegations against members of Tusk’s KO.
A former transport minister in the last Tusk government (2007-2014), Sławomir Nowak, saw the Polish strand of a corruption case against him discontinued by a Warsaw district court in early February 2026, with the public prosecutor supporting the application to close it, despite investigators having found more than 4 million złoty (€939,000) in cash during searches. Proceedings relating to the Ukrainian allegations continue.
Roman Giertych, a KO MP and attorney to the Tusk family, had an investigation against him discontinued in January 2025 by the Lublin regional prosecutor’s office. He had been a suspect since 2021 over the alleged misappropriation of 72 million złoty (€16.9 million) from the developer Polnord and the laundering of about 5.2 million złoty (€1.22 million). Prosecutors concluded he had acted only in a service capacity as lawyer to four companies. Rzeczpospolita reported that the prosecutor supervising the case opposed the discontinuation and was subsequently recalled from her secondment to the National Prosecutor’s Office.
Former Speaker of the Senate, the revising second chamber of the Polish parliament, Tomasz Grodzki has never had his immunity lifted over allegations of taking bribes when working as a senior surgeon in a hospital, leaving prosecutors unable to charge him.
On July 31, 2026, a KO MP, Wojciech Król, facing corruption charges from the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), had his immunity lifted by 436 votes to two, but a motion for his detention was rejected by 251 votes to 181. EPPO alleges he took more than 1.4 million złoty (€329,000) in bribes in return for help securing a 27 million złoty (€6.34 million) EU grant, and that he sought to influence witnesses.
As for the public’s views about the veracity of Poland’s judicial system after nearly three years of Tusk’s rule, a June poll from the Public Opinion Research Centre (CBOS), a State-funded research foundation, shows a high level of distrust.
Despite Tusk’s promises to reform the country’s judicial system, the number of Poles who negatively assess the way the judiciary performs its functions has grown during the lifetime of the present administration.
According to CBOS, 61 per cent of Poles surveyed between June 11 and 21 had a negative view of the way the judiciary functioned, up from 55 per cent in June 2022. Positive assessments fell from 28 per cent to 26 per cent over the same period, and the share rating the system “definitely badly” rose from 16 per cent to 22 per cent.
When asked to identify the greatest problems with the justice system, Poles, instead of mentioning changes in the top courts carried out by the PiS administration and attempted by the current government, pointed to structural issues, in other words those that are under the control of politicians.
The most commonly identified problem, chosen by 38 per cent of respondents who could select up to three main problems, was prolonged proceedings in court cases. The second biggest issue was politicisation of the courts, on 18 per cent, followed by unjust verdicts on 10 per cent. The survey covered 991 people.
The government has not kept its promise of separating the functions of justice minister and prosecutor general and has concentrated on attempting to change the personnel in the top and common courts rather than on structural reforms.
The attempts to change the personnel in the top courts have been blocked by President Karol Nawrocki and his PiS-aligned predecessor Andrzej Duda, as have attempts to remove around 3,000 judges appointed under the previous administration.
Moreover, the Tusk government has been inconsistent in its approach. For over two years it refused to recognise the legitimacy of the constitutional court (TK) because of its allegedly illegitimate composition and blocked elections in parliament to its membership, only to then change course and begin to elect the court’s judges when seeing it could secure a majority on the court by the end of this year.
Similarly, it had refused to recognise the legitimacy of the National Council of the Judiciary (KRS) because it had been elected by the previous parliament, only then to elect the members of the KRS in exactly the same way.
Having for years argued that it is unconstitutional for parliament to elect the KRS rather than for it to be done by judges, it has done precisely that, perhaps because in actual fact, ignored by the EU institutions too, the Polish constitution does not prescribe the method of electing the KRS.
It has also been inconsistent with regard to its view of the Supreme Court (SN), Poland’s top court in all matters that are not constitutional or administrative. While it had accepted that the Chamber of Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs, created and appointed during the lifetime of the last PiS government, could verify the Polish parliamentary, European parliamentary and local government results, it suddenly argued in 2025 that this body had no right to verify the presidential election result which Tusk’s ruling party lost.
Similarly, with regard to judgments made by the 3,000 judges whose legitimacy has been called into question, even though the Polish constitution makes clear that it is the President who appoints judges and that the KRS recommendations are not mandatory, the government has accepted some of these judgments while questioning others.
As for its argument that it wants to depoliticise the judiciary, that has been undone by its practice of nominating judges who had been active in campaigns against the previous PiS government.
Maciej Berek, who left the Cabinet on August 11 and whom Tusk called his “right hand”, is reported by Polityka Insight, Onet, OKO.press and TVN24 to be the coalition’s candidate for a seat on the constitutional court, replacing Justyn Piskorski when his term ends on September 18. He would be the eighth TK judge elected by the current parliament, giving those judges a majority. If confirmed, it will signal that Tusk is doing exactly what he had accused PiS of doing, taking control of the courts.
But the European Commission and the European Court of Justice, which had both been active in criticising and sanctioning the last PiS government, are keeping silent on the actions of the Tusk government.
The EC has welcomed Poland joining the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and Tusk’s plan for judicial reform, despite the fact that without consent of the President and the parliamentary opposition that plan cannot possibly succeed, as Tusk does not have the parliamentary super-majority (60 per cent) to overturn the presidential veto nor the two-thirds majority that would be required to change the constitution.
But unlike the families of victims of crimes who have seen court verdicts against perpetrators nullified on the grounds that the judge presiding was not legitimate, or those who have had the legality of their divorces questioned for the same reason, the EC and the ECJ do not have to face the practical consequences of their rulings on the public.
Meanwhile, given the growing judicial chaos, it is unsurprising that most people do not think justice will be done in cases of alleged corruption, regardless of the political colour of the perpetrator. The gridlock and lack of acceptance of the objectivity of those engaged in the process will prevent that.
