91ÌÒÉ«

Not just a Polish affair

The Constitution of 3 May is associated primarily with the history of Poland. However, as Dr Andrzej Kompa emphasises, it was a part of much broader transformations that swept across Europe at the end of the 18th century.

It was the era of the Enlightenment, political reforms and new ideas concerning the state, society and citizens’ rights. It was then that modern legal acts began to be created, designed to regulate the life of states in a comprehensive manner. As the first such act in Europe, the Constitution of 3 May forms part of the Enlightenment’s legacy

– says the historian.

The expert points out that documents containing provisions of a constitutional nature had, of course, existed earlier. He mentions, for example, the Statutes of San Marino of 1600 or the Polish Henrician Articles of 1573. However, the Constitution of 3 May had a different character. It was an attempt at a comprehensive ordering not only of political issues, but also of social ones.

First in Europe, second in the world?

We often hear that the Constitution of 3 May was the first in Europe and the second in the world, after the Constitution of the United States. Is this statement entirely accurate?

Dr Kompa replies that it does not always have to be about a strict ranking.

This wording, repeated like a mantra every year during the Polish Long May weekend, becomes rather commonplace. To some extent, it is meant to help us understand the importance of the Constitution and why, after so many decades, after two full centuries and part of a third, we should celebrate the anniversary of the adoption of this legal act as something exceptional

– he explains.

In other words, it is not only about whether it was first, second or fifth. What matters more is that it was a bold project of state reform at a moment when the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth was under enormous pressure from neighbouring powers.

The end of liberum veto and an attempt to repair the state

The Constitution of 3 May was intended to resolve specific systemic problems. The abolition of liberum veto, which for years had paralysed the political life of the Commonwealth was one of the most important ones.

The abolition of liberum veto, which shifted the centre of political decision-making towards majority decisions, was a modern step. It was a fundamental change. A state in which a single deputy could block the proceedings of the parliament was not capable of operating effectively. The Constitution was therefore meant to pull the Commonwealth out of political inertia

– underlines Dr Kompa.

The abandonment of the elective monarchy in favour of a hereditary monarchy was another importnat change. However, this did not mean absolute royal power. On the contrary, according to the historian, it was a model of parliamentary monarchy: not without the authority of the king and ministers, but with a significant role for the parliament, power exercised by the will of the nation and the separation of powers

– explains the historian.

Executive authority was to be more efficient, the judiciary independent of the legislative and executive powers, the state more stable and the succession to the throne less vulnerable to foreign influence and the chaos of interregna.

A step towards change

The Constitution of 3 May was not an ideal document by today’s standards. Dr Kompa notes that not all of its solutions can be considered modern or egalitarian in contemporary terms. At the same time, he stresses that in the realities of the 18th century it was an important step forward.

It improved the situation of the townspeople, strengthened the protection of peasants, remained in the positive memory of Polish Jews, made every immigrant free by definition and formed part of the process of limiting the old estate-based inequalities. It was a constitutional act that safeguarded freedoms rather than harmed them. Had it managed to function for longer, it would have been supplemented by the civil and criminal codes provided for in Article VIII

– says the expert.

What does the Constitution of 3 May tell us today?

Although the document was created over 200 years ago, its message remains relevant. According to Dr Kompa, the most important lesson concerns the rule of law.

The prosperity of the citizens of a given state and of all people under its jurisdiction depends entirely on whether the constitution is observed as a binding legal act

– says the historian, adding that a constitution does not function by itself. It must be respected and implemented by politicians, institutions and citizens alike. If its principles are stretched, circumvented or used in political struggle, the state weakens.

A celebration of citizenship and statehood

Should 3 May be a celebration of citizenship? In Dr Kompa’s view – It definitely should.

It is simultaneously a celebration of statehood and citizenship

– he emphasises.

The historian recalls that Poles even had to fight for the very right to celebrate this anniversary. During the periods of partitions, occupation and the Polish People’s Republic, commemorating 3 May was often an act of courage.

A curiosity: Poland without a pretender to the throne

Finally, Dr Kompa refers to a less well-known consequence of the Constitution of 3 May. The document provided for the hereditary succession to the throne and a transitional, renewed link between Poland and the Saxon Wettin dynasty. After the death of Stanisław August Poniatowski, the Saxon Elector Frederick Augustus, grandson of Augustus III, was to rule. Contrary to popular belief, the authors of the Constitution of 3 May did not assume a personal union with Saxony lasting for many generations. The Saxon Elector had no son, and never had one later, and in his homeland Salic law allowed succession to the throne only in the male line. Meanwhile, the Polish infanta was to become Maria Augusta Nepomucena, daughter of Frederick Augustus – and it was from her (and the husband chosen for her by the Polish parliament) that a new Polish royal line was to begin. The problem was that the would‑be infanta, although she lived to old age, never married and had no offspring.

The Constitution stipulated that in such a situation the next ruler, the progenitor of a new dynasty, would be chosen sovereignly by the Polish parliament. The unexpected result? Poland is one of the very few countries in the world that has no legal pretender to the throne

–  says the historian.

A legacy that obliges

The Constitution of 3 May was an act of political courage. It did not save the state from the partitions but it showed that the Commonwealth was not doomed to collapse due to a lack of ideas for reform. On the contrary, it was capable of producing one of the most important constitutional documents of its era. Had Poland not been destroyed by powerful neighbours, it would probably have become the key to necessary modernising reforms in the following century. All the more so because the basic law was to be reviewed every quarter of a century at a special parliament. A good analogous example is Sweden, which – despite threats – was able to survive and reform itself internally.

Therefore, 3 May is not merely a date from a textbook. It is a reminder that the state requires responsibility, that supreme law must be observed and that citizenship does not end with celebration but begins with care for the community. Let us celebrate all the more because, contrary to popular opinion, these are not commemorations of a national failure but of a success.

Source: Dr Andrzej Kompa
Edit: Kacper Szczepaniak, Centre for Brand Communications, 91ÌÒÉ«