Distinguished historians Antoni Dudek (Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University, Warsaw) and Rafał Wnuk (Catholic University of Lublin) among others have been discussing the future of the controversial Institute of National Remembrance (IPN). Both historians have worked closely with the IPN.
The Institute's mission is "to research and popularize the modern history of Poland and to investigate crimes committed from 8 November 1917, throughout the Second World War and the communist period, to 31 July 1990."
However, the "investigation of crimes" has in the view of many become indistinguishable from party political campaigns. The work of historian Sławomir Cenckiewicz symbolises this grey area between academic history that might heal national traumas and activist history that reopens old wounds or creates new ones.
On the one hand, Dudek has emphasized the value of Cenckiewicz's "investigative history" in uncovering uncomfortable truths in Lech Wałęsa's biography. On the other hand, Cenckiewicz's work has also been described as obsessive, blinded by hatred for Wałęsa, for example in his interest in Wałęsa's alleged extra-marital affair.
Dudek and Wnuk suggest a middle path between closing down the IPN altogether and an uncritical acceptance of its work, perhaps anticipating the new government's future deliberations. (Tusk's government has been focussed on state media and the judiciary.) These are their recommendations in brief:
Archives
The 90 km of documents should be preserved under the authority of IPN - other institutions do not have the scale required to manage the huge number of documents.
Preserve the name or "brand" IPN
Dudek believes that, despite many serious failures, that IPN has established itself as a positive force in Polish public life.
Investigative Division
This division should be closed in Dudek's view. Indeed he says it is "scandalous" that it still exists. Dudek says that even Law and Justice is in agreement on this point, but the former Minister of Justice, Zbigniew Ziobro personally blocked changes.
Vetting ("Lustracja")
Dudek suggests that vetting of public officials need not be managed by a special office at all. Instead, he recommends that easy and efficient access of archives to courts and journalists is sufficient to enable vetting to take place when required.
Commemoration
Here both professors agree that activities related to commemoration of historical figures and events, monuments etc. should be managed by a separate, specialist institution.
Academic research and publishing
Dudek positively assesses IPN's work here, only adding that a number of poor or unnecessary books were also published. To Wnuk's doubt that the academic division has also became a propaganda tool, Dudek suggested that additional academic bodies should be introduced into IPN, following the model of the Polish Academy of Sciences.
However, Dudek gave a broader argument that IPN should continue in its academic work since Polish 20th history is so much characterised by dictatorship that a specialist institute is necessary, one with expertise in non-democratic movements and regimes. Not only the communist period, but also the interwar period of dictatorship and the (foreign) wartime dictatorships require ongoing study.
Funding parity
Both professors agree that IPN should have a reduced budget, in particular considering that the totality of IPN in its current form has a similar budget to the entire Polish Academy of Sciences - a research institute covering all subjects, not only history.
Sources:
Historia bez kitu, IPN website, wp.pl, wyborcza.pl, dzieje.pl
pt