Professor Ryszard Piotrowski argues that the Polish Cybersecurity Act is inconsistent with the nation's constitution, particularly in how it implements permanent measures that should only apply during states of emergency. He points out that while such emergencies can be declared temporarily, the act enshrines certain responses as permanent legal standards without the proper constitutional justification. This raises concerns about the legality and appropriateness of these measures in light of Poland's democratic rules.

Piotrowski highlights specific provisions within the act, such as Article 67g, which grants the Minister responsible for digitization the authority to issue a 'protective order' during a critical incident. This order, he argues, encroaches on established rights under administrative procedure laws, allowing the Minister to bypass customary legal processes under certain conditions. Such powers could lead to significant ramifications for due process and individual rights, particularly if life or health is at stake, leading to a potential abuse of authority.

Overall, the implications of Piotrowski's critique raise critical questions about the balance between national security needs in cyberspace and the protection of civil liberties. The discussion around the Cybersecurity Act may ignite broader debates on how Poland navigates its security strategies while adhering to constitutional mandates, underscoring the need for careful legislative scrutiny in safeguarding democratic principles alongside cyber resilience.