A government bill on restrictive measures is intended to create an armor protecting Poland from hybrid attacks from the East, but by ignoring the National Broadcasting Council and giving tax officials the power to assess media content, it risks turning the fight against disinformation into outright censorship.
“Sanctions Constitution” and Its Goals
The Council of Ministers has adopted a bill on restrictive measures (Sejm Bill No. 3003, submitted by the Minister of Foreign Affairs), which was sent to the Sejm in August 2026 and received its first reading in September. The bill, referred to as the “Sanctions Constitution,” is intended to consolidate and organize the existing fragmented regulations governing the application of EU sanctions in Poland, covering more than 40 regimes, as well as international and national sanctions.
The government justifies the need for the new legislation by citing the need to eliminate jurisdictional disputes between state authorities, provide greater legal certainty for businesses, and implement EU Directive 2024/1226 of April 2024, which harmonizes the definitions of offenses and penalties for violations of restrictive measures.
The primary objective of the bill is to establish permanent mechanisms to protect Poland’s national security against hybrid threats from third countries, particularly in the context of Russia’s and Belarus’s aggressive actions.
FIMI and the Provisions Raising the Greatest Concerns
The main controversy surrounding the proposed measures centers on the introduction of a new basis for inclusion on the sanctions list maintained by the head of the Ministry of the Interior and Administration – the so-called FIMI criterion (Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference). Under the bill, sanctions could be imposed for the “direct” or “indirect” support of foreign interference and manipulation in the information environment aimed at undermining national security, the inviolability of Poland’s borders, or the country’s international standing.
A person or entity placed on the list could face exceptionally severe measures, including the freezing of assets and property, a ban on providing financial resources, exclusion from public procurement, and the appointment of a temporary compulsory administrator.
Violations of sanctions regulations could also result in administrative fines of up to PLN 20 million and criminal liability carrying a prison sentence of up to 12 years.
Experts are particularly concerned about the broad and vague wording of the FIMI criterion, which, in EU definitions, covers tactics that are often formally legal and fall into what is known as a gray area. The use of the phrase “indirect support” creates a risk of excessive discretion and arbitrary decisions by the executive branch with regard to the media. Furthermore, a decision by the Ministry of the Interior and Administration to place an entity on the list would remain in force until a final court judgment is issued, which in practice could lead to the financial and legal paralysis of a media organization before an independent judiciary has even verified the legitimacy of the state’s actions.
The National Broadcasting Council Warns of a Threat to Media Freedom
A key voice opposing the proposed measures has been the official letter from Dr. Agnieszka Glapiak, Chairwoman of the National Broadcasting Council (KRRiT), dated September 25, 2026, and addressed to the Speaker of the Sejm as well as the chairs and members of the relevant parliamentary committees.
The KRRiT pointed to a number of risks and procedural shortcomings.
The bill was not consulted with the KRRiT at any stage of the legislative process, effectively disregarding the body responsible for safeguarding freedom of speech, the right to information, and the independence of media service providers.
The chairwoman of the KRRiT also warned that, under the pretext of ensuring state security and combating foreign disinformation, imprecise mechanisms are being created that could allow officials to arbitrarily suppress unwanted statements. Dr. Glapiak pointed out that authorities could, for example, regard views skeptical of policies concerning relations with Ukraine, the European Union, migration policy, climate change, or social and cultural issues as “support for foreign interference.”
The KRRiT expressed particular opposition to Article 55, item 20, in conjunction with Article 59, paragraph 2, item 1 of the bill, under which a fine of up to PLN 20 million for broadcasting, facilitating the broadcasting of, or advertising content involving sanctioned entities would be imposed by the Head of the Customs and Tax Office. Such a decision would be immediately enforceable, without the right to file a conventional request for reconsideration. The KRRiT described the transfer of such powers to tax officials – who lack the specialized expertise necessary to assess media content – as an absurd solution.
Warning Against Extrajudicial Blocking of Content
The KRRiT referred to the analogy of President Karol Nawrocki’s veto of the legislation implementing the Digital Services Act (DSA), recalling that extrajudicial administrative blocking of content undermines the balance between security and civil rights. Existing regulations, including Poland’s Broadcasting Act and the EU’s DSA, already provide sufficient tools to combat illegal content without the need to create extraordinary procedures.
The KRRiT made it clear that it does not question the need to implement EU Directive 2024/1226 or the need to protect Poland’s security, but categorically opposes the introduction of a discretionary component of national sanctions imposed by the Ministry of the Interior and Administration.
Can an Autocratic Regime Be Defended Without Autocratic Methods?
The answer emerging from an analysis of the bill and the positions of the KRRiT and legal experts is: yes, but only if strict rule-of-law safeguards are maintained.
The threat posed by hostile powers using hybrid operations and FIMI is undeniable. However, shifting the burden of combating disinformation from independent courts to tax officials and the administrative apparatus of the Ministry of the Interior and Administration means adopting methods characteristic of authoritarian regimes.
A democratic state cannot protect freedom by preemptively taking it away from citizens and the media. To effectively repel foreign threats without destroying Poland’s own democracy, all restrictive measures must be based on precise legal definitions, proportionality, and immediate, independent judicial review.