Two of Poland's leaders sent different signals on Saturday on legislation designed to unblock European Union funds, underscoring divisions in the ruling camp over a bill that has seen mounting uncertainty over its future.
Poland's government, embroiled in a long-running row with the EU over alleged politicisation of the country's courts, said on Tuesday it had agreed amendments to a judicial law with Brussels that would release 35.4 billion euros ($37.5 billion) in COVID-19 recovery funds withheld over the dispute.
However, on Saturday ruling party leader Jaroslaw Kaczynski, widely seen as Poland's de facto ruler, was quoted as saying the bill containing the amendments could be "extremely destructive".
Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki subsequently urged lawmakers to quickly resolve the dispute with Brussels, arguing that unblocking the funds would help Poland boost defence spending as war rages in neighbouring Ukraine as well as shoring up the country's financial security.
"The dispute with the European Commission must be ended, because the real conflict is taking place east of Poland today," Morawiecki wrote in a Facebook post.
The bill has split the ruling camp, with the ultra-conservative United Poland, a junior partner in government, saying it will vote against it on the grounds that it damages Polish sovereignty and could cause chaos in the judicial system.
After President Andrzej Duda expressed doubts about the legislation, the ruling nationalist Law and Justice (PiS) party said it would be taken off the agenda of a parliamentary sitting on Thursday, leaving the reform proposals in limbo.
The comments by PiS leader Kaczynski added to uncertainty over the bill's passage.
"The effects in Poland could be extremely destructive, not only for the judiciary, but also for the entire state apparatus," Kaczynski was quoted as saying in an extract of an interview with the Gazeta Polska weekly.
He said its adoption would "probably, but not certainly" fulfil the milestones set out by the European Commission as conditions for receiving the funds, but it required further consultation.
Under the bill, the Supreme Administrative Court would deal with disciplinary cases instead of a contested chamber of the Supreme Court, in a bid to address concerns that the previous system had been used to punish judges critical of the government's judicial reforms.
Judges would also not face disciplinary action for questioning the independence of colleagues appointed by organs that critics say are politicised.
($1 = 0.9450 euros)
(Reporting by Alan Charlish; Editing by Helen Popper and David Holmes)
