Tuesday, 13 January 2026
In January 2026, Polish President Karol Nawrocki refused to sign legislation designed to introduce national procedures for supervising large online platforms and responding to unlawful material on the internet. The bill had been approved by parliament as part of Poland’s effort to align its domestic framework with new European rules governing digital services.
The president’s decision does not affect the European regulation itself, which applies automatically across all EU member states. Instead, the veto concerns how those rules would be enforced within Poland, including which public bodies would be responsible and how decisions affecting online content could be challenged.
According to the president, the proposed law raised constitutional concerns. He argued that it would allow public authorities to interfere with access to online content through administrative decisions, while judicial involvement would occur only if an affected individual or company took the initiative to appeal. In his view, this approach placed too much responsibility on citizens and businesses to defend their rights after a restriction had already been imposed.
Under the vetoed framework, regulators would have been able to order the removal or blocking of certain types of unlawful material. While appeal mechanisms were included, they relied on strict deadlines and required those affected to bear the cost and effort of legal action. Critics of the bill argued that, in fast-moving public debate and digital commerce, even short-lived restrictions can have lasting consequences.
Supporters of the legislation countered that the rules were intended to strengthen online safety and bring Poland into line with European standards. They warned that delaying the creation of a national enforcement system could leave gaps in oversight and reduce protections for users, particularly in sensitive areas such as harmful or criminal content.
The debate has also highlighted concerns about the role of specially recognised reporting organisations whose notices would receive priority treatment from platforms. Opponents of the bill questioned whether granting such status—potentially alongside public financial support—could create indirect influence over public debate, even if decisions formally remained with platforms and regulators.
With the veto in place, the law has been sent back to parliament. Lawmakers may attempt to override the decision, revise the legislation to address constitutional objections, or draft a new proposal altogether. Whatever route is chosen, Poland will need to balance European obligations with domestic safeguards to ensure that measures aimed at tackling illegal online activity do not undermine freedom of expression or legal certainty for digital businesses.
Source: WEI
