FILE PHOTO: Newly appointed Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk receives the resolution of the Sejm of the Republic of Poland from Polish Speaker of Parliament Szymon Holownia, after he won the vote of confidence for his government, in Parliament, in Warsaw, Poland December 12, 2023. REUTERS/Aleksandra Szmigiel/File Photo
WARSAW (Reuters) - Poland's parliament speaker distanced himself on Monday from plans to suspend the right to asylum announced by Prime Minister Donald Tusk, amid unease in parts of the ruling coalition that the measures may break the constitution and international law.
Migration has been high on the agenda in Poland since 2021, when large numbers of people, mainly from the Middle East and Africa, started trying to illegally cross the border with Belarus in what Warsaw and the European Union said was a crisis orchestrated by Minsk and its ally Russia.
Russia and Belarus have denied responsibility.
The issue looks set to play an important role in a presidential election expected in May 2025, and Tusk has adopted a tough stance that has broad public support but which has been criticised by human rights advocates.
On Saturday during a congress organised by his Civic Coalition (KO), the largest grouping in the government, the prime minister said Poland planned to temporarily suspend the right to asylum and vowed to reject any European Union migration policies that Warsaw believes undermine its security.
He later said in a post on social media platform X that Finland had introduced legislation to temporarily suspend asylum applications in May.
However on Monday, Parliament Speaker Szymon Holownia, who leads the centre-right Poland 2050 party which forms part of the government, joined the Left in saying that Tusk was speaking only for KO and that the measures had not been discussed with coalition partners.
"We are of the opinion that the right to asylum is 'sacred' in international law and results from conventions ratified by the Republic of Poland," he said in a Facebook post, adding that any suspension could only take place in a state of emergency.
"No tactical goal can involve betraying our values, because it ends with us becoming the 'lesser evil'," he wrote.
(Reporting by Alan Charlish, additional reporting by Pawel Florkiewicz; Editing by Alex Richardson)
