Poland election: what you need to know
The election pits liberal Warsaw Mayor Rafal Trzaskowski, a senior member of the ruling Civic Platform party (PO), against historian Karol Nawrocki, who runs Poland's Institute of National Remembrance, and far-right Slawomir Mentzen.
Here is a guide to the election, including candidate profiles and key issues:
Prime Minister Donald Tusk's coalition came to power in 2023, vowing to undo the previous Law and Justice (PiS) government's judicial reforms that critics said eroded the rule of law.
However, its efforts have been hampered by former nationalist PiS government ally President Andrzej Duda, who has the power to veto legislation.
Voters will select the president for a five-year term through a two-round system. If no candidate scores more than 50% in the first round, a run-off will be held between the top two contenders on June 1.
Presidents can serve a maximum of two terms. Duda's second term ends on August 6.
Polls open at 7 a.m. (0500 GMT) and close at 9 p.m. on May 18. Around 29 million people are eligible to vote.
Exit polls will be published shortly after voting ends. Partial results will trickle in throughout the evening on Sunday and on Monday.
Rafal Trzaskowski
The frontrunner, 53-year-old Trzaskowski has served as the mayor of Warsaw since 2018. He was narrowly defeated by Duda in the 2020 presidential vote.
Trzaskowski's main proposals include increasing defence spending to 5% of GDP, liberalising abortion laws and developing Poland's arms and technology industry, as well as ensuring Poland has a strong position in the European Union.
Karol Nawrocki
A conservative historian, 42, Nawrocki is backed by the nationalist Law and Justice (PiS) party, which lost power to Tusk in 2023.
Between 2017-21, he ran the Museum of the Second World War in Gdansk, in northern Poland.
He wants to see lower taxes, a withdrawal from the European Union's Migration Pact and Green Deal, and is critical of giving more rights to LGBT couples.
Like Trzaskowski, he wants to allocate 5% of GDP to defence.
He is currently polling in second place.
Slawomir Mentzen
Far-right candidate Slawomir Mentzen, 38, runs a tax advisory firm and is a vocal critic of government regulation.
His key proposals include significant tax cuts, withdrawing from the European Green Deal and opposing more gay rights.
He believes Poland should avoid taking on excessive military or financial responsibilities in the Ukraine-Russia war. He wants to prioritise Poland's sovereignty by ensuring its constitution overrides EU laws.
He is currently polling in third place.
Szymon Holownia
The speaker of Poland's lower house of parliament, 48-year-old Holownia previously worked as a journalist and television presenter. He founded the political movement Polska 2050, a centrist grouping that is now part of the governing coalition.
Holownia's key proposals include promoting regional development, improving public transport and increasing access to affordable housing. He wants to reduce bureaucracy, support Polish businesses, and develop Poland's domestic arms production capabilities.
The left
Three leftist candidates are also in the race, with 43-year-old Magdalena Biejat, Deputy Senate Speaker, having the highest support. She is one of the most vocal proponents of women's and minority rights, and wants to allow access to abortion after a near-total ban on the procedure was introduced under PiS.
Biejat's proposals focus on reducing poverty, increasing public sector wages and making housing more affordable.
Her programme is similar to that of 45-year-old Adrian Zandberg, head of the Razem (Together) party.
The last leftist candidate is 76-year-old Joanna Senyszyn, an academic, lawmaker and former member of the Polish United Workers' Party which ran the country until the fall of Communism.
Other candidates
Also running in a 13-candidate field is the far-right's Grzegorz Braun, opens new tab, who in 2023 used a fire extinguisher to put out Hanukkah candles in the country's parliament, an incident that caused international outrage.
Another candidate is 42-year-old Krzysztof Stanowski, a journalists and YouTuber, who has no political programme and says he wants to show people the campaign behind the scenes and raise money for charities.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Statesman
an hour ago
- New Statesman
Keir Starmer alienates left and right on Gaza
Photo by Toby Melville -. Over the weekend, three posters appeared next to Kentish Town West overground station, plastered onto the billboards which sit under the bridge to the left of the entrance. They read: 'Wanted Keir Starmer', calling out the Prime Minister for his perceived complicity in Israel's war in Gaza. They, and other posters, popped up around London on Saturday ahead of a wider mobilisation of activists, led by Palestinian Youth Movement. Kentish Town is at the heart of Starmer's constituency – Holborn and St Pancras – but it is also the place that the Prime Minister called home before last year's general election. His favourite pub, The Pineapple sits to the north of the area, and he still plays five-aside football on a Kentish Town pitch. It is a political home. But things are shifting. In 2019 Starmer was returned to Holborn and St Pancras with a majority of 27,763. In 2024 it had dropped to 18,884. This cannot be explained away entirely by the war in Gaza. But the pro-Gaza independent who ran against Starmer in 2024, Andrew Feinstein certainly squeezed some of his vote. The slow gestation of the new left-wing party (whose founding is being co-led by Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana) has awakened talk of Feinstein's candidacy. He has said he will support and likely join the new party and Holborn and St Pancras is already being talked about as a key target (despite the next general election still being four years away). But this is a scenario which is playing out for members across the cabinet; it is not unique to the Prime Minister. Fury over Gaza was bubbling even before the last election, now it is organised. Wes Streeting, Shabanna Mahmood and Jess Philips have already felt the heat in their constituencies. Streeting held onto his Ilford North constituency last year by just 528 votes with Philips facing a similar position, winning a majority of 693. Both constituencies featured heavily mobilised campaigns over Gaza. Protests under the banner of a 'Siege on Labour' will take place in all three of these constituencies today; Lammy and Streeting's offices will be directly targeted by protesters. The catalyst for this was likely Starmer's decision last week that the UK will recognise the state of Palestine if the Israeli government commits to a ceasefire (government insiders have said the PM has been working on a plan for exactly how to do this for months). But the government has repeatedly been criticised for dragging its feet on the issue and last week, this disparagement grew to include members of the cabinet. The timing of last week's announcement seemed as much an act of party management as anything else. But his announcement last Tuesday has assuaged the concerns of no one. Pro-Gaza MPs say he is not moving fast enough. A group of peers, sympathetic to Israel, said last week that Starmer risks breaking international law with his pledge, and lawyers representing the remaining hostages have expressed their fury at what they see as the UK's capitulation to the demands of Hamas. Both sides say they are being used as 'bargaining chips'. On Sunday night, Starmer came under renewed pressure to delay recognition after a senior Hamas official said the same move by the UK and other nations to recognise a Palestinian state is 'one of the fruits of October 7'. Wider comparisons between Starmer and Tony Blair (and the rage over Iraq) are being made. For the New Labour leader, as for Starmer, a deep crisis in the Middle East has created a fresh and choleric fault line in British politics. But unlike Iraq, the war in Gaza is a crisis Starmer was dealing with before he became Prime Minister; and the damage to Labour has already been wrought. Indeed, the electoral peril to Labour over this issue already appears greater than that over Iraq. And with the arrival of a new party, whose main focus is likely to be government failures on Gaza, this is just the beginning of four years of firefighting. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Related
The National
2 hours ago
- The National
Here's why the UK Government wants you to feel as if war is coming
In June, Keir Starmer launched the Strategic Defence Review (SDR) in an enormous BAE Systems warehouse in Govan. He said the UK would move to a 'war-fighting readiness'. His language was purposeful; we are meant to feel as if we are on the brink of war. It means more money will go to arms companies, whose profits are already in the billions, while international aid will be cut, and those across the globe who need it most will be left without much-needed support. Starmer said then that the UK Government will increase defence spending to 2.5% of gross domestic product (GDP) from April 2027 with an ambition – but no firm commitment – to increase it to 3% during the next parliament. READ OUR FULL DEFENCE MINI-SERIES: This was not a surprise – European rearmament has occurred to appease the demands of US President Donald Trump. Trump set the hares racing when he suggested that he would drop military support to Ukraine and walk away from Nato if other members failed to meet their spending requirements. To hammer the point home in signature style, Trump summoned Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy to the White House for a live dressing down in front of the whole world, followed by the suspension of military aid and intelligence sharing. His message: You are nothing to us. In the rush to placate Trump, the target of spending 2% of GDP on defence jumped to an ambition to spend 5% on defence and related industries by 2035. This story was told in the context of the threat posed by Russia, which has been unable to conquer a country less than a third of its size in a more than three-year-long war. Realistically, the prospect of the US deserting Nato and perhaps wielding its economic might in the form of tariffs focused minds more than the risk of immediate war with Vladimir Putin (below). (Image: Vyacheslav Prokofyev) Handily, it also seems it will further cement America's position as the world's largest arms exporter. Between 2015 and 2019, the USA accounted for 35% share of global arms exports; between 2020 to 2024, that shot up to 43%. With Trump's tariffs throwing world trade into a period of dizzying uncertainty, it seems he at least had a plan to keep the world buying American-made killing machines, with European Nato members now getting around two-thirds of their weapons from the USA. In the UK, Starmer wanted to paint his defence review as hand in hand with industrial regeneration. We are supposed to believe that to save industry, and create jobs, we must pivot skills and apprentices into industries that make machines for mass killing. We are supposed to envision family-owned bomb factories boosting the economy with fat order books, but the reality is that arms companies are already raking it in. The supposed industrial renaissance was unable to save the Grangemouth oil refinery or several other manufacturers that have folded since Labour came to power. They say one thing while doing another. Foreign Secretary David Lammy claimed that the UK is not sending weapons to Israel which could be used in Gaza. But they are. They continue to export F-35 parts, and they have been documented as being used by Israel in Gaza. It's complicity in a genocide, but ministers repeat the lie – the UK is not supplying arms to Israel. Still, BAE System's profit margins are looking healthy. In Scotland, the SNP have found themselves in a bit of a pickle over defence, with a policy split emerging between those who support the current policy not to invest public money in arms, while others suggest it should be embraced. READ MORE: Labour defence spending 'one of most inefficient ways' to create jobs The party has not attacked in principle the 5% Nato target, only the means of getting there. Too much is being spent on nuclear weapons, they have complained. It mustn't be funded by cuts to international development or by raiding the welfare budget, they have demanded. But the positive case is not forthcoming. In a recent interview, the party's international affairs spokesperson, Stephen Gethins, suggested the money could come from re-joining the European Union. At the Holyrood level, First Minister John Swinney has sought to keep a low profile – in contrast with the combative tone Humza Yousaf took on [[Gaza]], Nicola Sturgeon whipping MPs to vote against bombing Syria or even Alex Salmond's criticism of the 'unpardonable folly' of the Nato bombing of Serbia. (Image: PA) This is evidenced in the disastrous episode where Swinney sanctioned a meeting between his External Affairs Secretary Angus Robertson and Israeli deputy ambassador Daniela Grudsky Ekstein. We saw it too in his calls for 'de-escalation' when America bombed Iran while failing to condemn Trump for doing so. It's a far cry from the 'bombs not bairns' slogan which captured hearts and minds during the independence referendum. It's clear the SNP has not emerged unscathed from the vicissitudes of a rapidly changing world. But let's be clear – defence is a reserved matter. The Labour Government would rather accuse the SNP of playing 'student politics' over its policy stance, being dismissive rather than engaging with any substance. As we revealed, those jobs are not guaranteed, and upping defence spending is 'one of the most inefficient ways' to create them. Meanwhile, a former adviser to the UN Secretary-General said that Starmer's plan will actually make the country more insecure. It's a deliberate tactic, they want to look strong, to harken back to a time where the UK was a bigger player on the world stage, to claw back voters who may be considering going over to Reform UK. It ties in with Labour's giddy adoption of the Union Flag before it came to power. They want to create a perception of strength, while funnelling money to arms firms with no morals, and a desire to keep the war machine running in the pursuit of profit. Never mind the human cost, or higher taxes, that will come as a result. It certainly won't be the jobs boost that has been promised.
Daily Mirror
8 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Home Office ramps up small boats gangs crackdown with £100million cash boost
The cash will also fund a pilot of the 'one-in, one-out' returns deal with France, which will see migrants who arrive illegally in dinghies sent back across the Channel Border security will be beefed up with a £100million boost to crack down on vile people smuggling gangs. The funding will pay for up to 300 additional National Crime Agency officers, new detection technology and equipment to smash the criminal networks bringing desperate people to Britain in small boats. The cash will also fund a pilot of the 'one-in, one-out' returns deal with France, which will see migrants who arrive illegally in dinghies sent back across the Channel for the first time. It comes after Nigel Farage appearances on Sky News sparked thousands of complaints. Overtime will be ramped up for enforcement teams and more funding for interventions across Europe, Middle East, Africa and Asia to disrupt smuggling routes. Ministers are battling to drive down small boat crossings, which have exceeded 25,000 so far this year - a record for this point in the summer. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said: "For six years, the small boat smuggling gangs were allowed to embed their criminal trade along our coast, and have shown a ruthless ability to adapt their tactics and maximise their profits, no matter how many lives they put at risk. They must not be allowed to get away with this vile crime. 'That is why this government has developed a serious and comprehensive plan to dismantle their business model, from disrupting their supply chains across the European continent to clamping down on their illegal working operations here in the UK." Ms Cooper will unveil plans in the autumn to overhaul the appeals system to slash the spiralling backlog and reduce the number of asylum seekers in hotels. As of March, there were 50,976 outstanding appeals - nearly double the number in 2024 and seven times higher than in 2023. The Home Secretary wants decisions to be made in weeks rather than months, as the average wait to hear appeals is 54 weeks. She told the Sunday Times: 'We need a major overhaul of the appeal [process] and that's what we are going to do in the autumn … if we speed up the decision-making appeal system and also then keep increasing returns, we hope to be able to make quite a big reduction in the overall numbers in the asylum system, because that is the best way to actually restore order and control.' It comes amid a wave of anti-immigration protests as asylum hotels become a flashpoint for community tensions Demonstrators clashed with police outside a hotel housing migrants in north London on Saturday, while hundreds of people took part in a demo organised by far-right group Britain First in Manchester. On Sunday, the police watchdog warned there is "every possibility" of a repeat of the unrest that broke out last summer in the wake of the Southport murders. His Majesty's Chief Inspector of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services Sir Andy Cooke said the "tools that amplified hatred last summer remain largely unchanged and unregulated". He said: "The police service should not be caught off-guard again. There is every possibility that similar violence could reoccur. "Online misinformation continues to spread. Community tensions persist. The tools that amplified hatred last summer remain largely unchanged and unregulated. "The police service must modernise its understanding of how disorder develops and spreads in the digital age."
