Karol Nawrocki submits alternate medical fraud bill proposing up to 15 years in prison
President Karol Nawrocki has submitted a draft amendment to Poland's penal code targeting pseudomedical practices, one day after referring the government's rival legislation to the Constitutional Tribunal.
Presidential initiative and referral to tribunal
On 20 August 2026, Polish President Karol Nawrocki referred the government's amendment to the Act on Patient Rights and the Patient Ombudsman, known as lex szarlatan, to the Constitutional Tribunal for preventive control. The referral blocks the government's measure from entering into force until the tribunal evaluates its constitutionality. Nawrocki argued that the cabinet's draft risked treating legitimate herbalists, dietary supplement sellers, and complementary medicine providers as criminal fraudsters.
Following the referral, Head of the Chancellery of the President Zbigniew Bogucki announced that Nawrocki submitted an alternate legislative proposal to the Sejm. The presidential draft, marked with a receipt date of 20 August 2026, aims to establish a specific criminal framework penalizing individuals who exploit sick patients for commercial gain while preserving patient choice in alternative therapies.
- Karol Nawrocki refers the government's lex szarlatan bill to the Constitutional Tribunal and files his alternative draft to the Sejm
- Presidential Chancellery Head Zbigniew Bogucki announces the details of the presidential penal code amendment
Proposed penalties and penal code changes
The presidential bill amends the Polish Penal Code by adding article 160a and modifies the Act on Patient Rights. The legislation establishes penalties for persuading a patient not to undertake or to discontinue diagnostic procedures or medical treatment prescribed by an authorized healthcare professional. If enacted, the provisions would take effect three months after official promulgation.
The draft creates a tiered scale of criminal penalties based on patient health outcomes. Persuading a patient to abandon conventional treatment and thereby exposing them to direct danger of death or severe injury carries up to three years in prison. If the action leads to grievous bodily harm, the prison sentence ranges from one to 10 years. In cases where the patient dies after discontinuing treatment due to third-party influence, the bill sets a term of three to 15 years of imprisonment.
- Direct danger of life or serious harm
- 3 years
- Causing grievous bodily harm
- 10 years
- Causing patient death
- 15 years
Government and parliamentary reaction
Representatives of the government coalition and opposition factions criticised the presidential draft and the decision to stall the original legislation. Deputy Head of the Prime Minister's Chancellery Jakub Stefaniak argued that the government bill gave the Patient Ombudsman necessary administrative tools to halt dangerous non-medical practices, noting that patients harmed by unproven treatments inevitably require state-funded emergency intervention.
It gives the official tools to eliminate from this market people who want to treat cancer by encouraging drinking urine or other liquids, treating cancer by abandoning oncological therapy in favor of apples or who knows what else.
Leader of the Left parliamentary club Anna Maria Żukowska stated that the president's move created uncertainty for vulnerable individuals and served as a political overture to anti-vaccine and conspiracy-oriented voting blocs.
People who are in severe oncological conditions often do not think rationally. They grasp at every possible hope, including irrational things.
Legal and journalistic scrutiny
Legal experts and investigative journalists questioned whether the presidential proposal could be effectively enforced. Jagiellonian University legal scholar Mikołaj Małecki argued that the legal phrasing of the term "nakłania" (induces) would make prosecution difficult. Małecki added that paragraph 7 of the draft, which exempts expressions of personal belief, would prevent successful convictions in court.
Journalist Michał Janczura stated that the draft could weaken existing enforcement avenues under article 58 of the Medical Profession Act. Bogucki maintained that the presidential bill strikes a balance by protecting patient health against manipulation while defending lawful business operations in complementary medicine.
