Recent protests in Poland against the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (see Tomasz Kitliński’s and Tim O’Flaherty’s post) galvanized an unusual array of people from across the political spectrum. The protests were initially ignored by the government, which decided to sign the agreement aimed at protecting copyrights. Yet after the President’s, Prime minister’s and other officials’ websites were hacked by anonymous groups claiming to be fighting against ACTA in the name of freedom, Prime Minister Donald Tusk reconsidered, promised to stall the ratification process and called for debate.

Unsurprisingly, many claim the call came too late. The agreement had been already signed, although it still has to be ratified by the Polish and European Parliaments. Many organizations and individuals criticizing ACTA refused to participate in the debate with the Prime Minister, seeing the event as a publicity stunt. Nonetheless, over two hundred people turned up at the Chancellery of the Prime Minister to take part in the debate on “Freedoms and Rights on the Internet,” one that quickly turned out to be a discussion about ACTA, but also about much more, perhaps most importantly about the role of public consultations in lawmaking. There is a possibility that this may be a turning point in the democratic deliberative practices in Poland.

During the meeting Mr. Tusk gave a rather unconvincing apology for not noticing the critical comments before ACTA was signed, and did refuse to annul the agreement – a demand made be the vast majority of the participants. He maintained that without ratification by the Polish parliament it would not come to force. While the Prime Minister, often accused of caring more about popularity polls than governing, seemed genuinely surprised by the uproar caused by the agreement, he did point out that the protests could have been caused by something more than ACTA itself. Indeed, the discussants voiced their concerns about such issues as the right of companies to access sensitive data without court orders, increasing restrictions for users on goods protected by copyright laws detached from internet reality, and, last but not least, about the secrecy involved in creating ACTA – even the states could not access some of the documents during the negotiations – implicitly stating that this sort of incomprehensible secrecy undermines the fundamental trust in government.

The eight-hour long debate ended without a clear conclusion. The only promise made was for more public consultations. Yet this very well may be a most significant outcome, although some skepticism is in order. ACTA turned out to be the trigger for open public discontent, with demonstrations, hacking of governmental websites and calls for an anti-ACTA referendum and as a result the prime minister decided the best solution was to sit down and talk. It may have been a bit late. It did feel like a publicity stunt. Yet, people did come and engage in a discussion, which is to be continued and taken into consideration by lawmakers. Video streams from the debate are available online, and suddenly citizens are paying attention. Democratic change seems to be on the horizon.

The recent parliamentary elections in Poland allowed many to heave a sigh of relief. Once again Law and Justice, the party known best for propagating religious conservatism, war language and conspiracy theory has been pushed back to the opposition. It is also the first time in Poland’s history of a democratic state that the ruling party, Civic Platform, has managed to stay in power longer than one term. So should democrats be cheering?

A popular feeling among the voters was that there was no one to choose from. Once more people left their homes to choose a lesser evil, that is Civic Platform, whose leader, Donald Tusk, promised the politics of love, but said nothing about the much needed changes. Indeed, Poland has been lucky in the crisis managing to keep her economy growing, but after the Civic Platform’s first full term, the country’s internal issues, including employment and retirement reforms, are still waiting to be approached. Will the ruling party be more courageous this time?

Yet significant change has occurred. While the center and right look pretty much as they did before, a notable shift can be seen on the left side of the political stage. The post-communist leftist party with a bureaucratic leader lacking any noticeable ideology lost a significant number of votes to a new movement centered around Janusz Palikot, a charismatic businessman turned politician. Palikot gained attention as a member of the Civic Platform, but was thrown out of the party for his foul tongue and press conferences in which he used plastic guns and dildos as his unconventional props. Yet, beyond the show, Palikot’s efforts to improve regulations for small business and his open aversion to the Catholic Church’s omnipresence in political life, resonated with the public. Still, the high number of votes his movement received came as a surprise both to the voters and Palikot himself.

Now, after more than two decades of democratic rule, Poland shares similar ills with its neighbors: political spectacle instead of policy-making, lacking a vision of where to go next. The good old days, when the country’s goals were fixed on the accession to NATO and the European Union, are long gone, and the new challenges, that Poland is now facing within its own state, the EU, as well as in the global order, have no ready answers. Yet, the recent elections do represent an advance. The solutions offered by right-wing radicals and the post-communist left have been voted out. The upcoming term will show if we have elected a new meaningful center-left shift or a continuation of the same old political media spectacle.