The purpose of the article is to indicate the selected potential and desired consequences of establishing doctoral schools to educate doctoral students in the field of legal sciences, with a special consideration of the interdisciplinary nature of such schools. The paper addresses the Polish legal framework. The article proposes a thesis that doctoral schools have a chance to benefit the education of future doctors of law, especially thanks to their interdisciplinary nature, which involves
educating doctoral students of law together with representatives of other scientific disciplines. Other issues raised include also the opportunities and risks involved in the new form of doctoral education – including those resulting from some higher education institutions adopting only apparently interdisciplinary solutions. The article is an original work, the subject matter has not been covered in other academic papers, and concerns a new legal form of educating doctoral students – meaning
doctoral schools, which have been operating since the 2019/2020 academic year. The theses proposed in the article may be significant to both the theory and practice of educating doctors of law at Polish higher education institutions and research centres.

Academics and faculty members are entangled in many interests. Selfless science for cognitive purposes is a thing of the past. There is a constant game of the power over knowledge. Apart from scientists, many entities with various interests are participants of the game. They are: politicians, officials, academic administration, research sponsors, accreditation agencies, publishers, resort scientific institutes, industry, business. The scientists themselves sometimes work for the truth and sometimes they work for profit; they create knowledge which is public property, or when they are employed commercially, e.g. by the industry, they create private knowledge. This paper presents five factors which may contribute to restricting the cognitive autonomy of the scientists.

The Act on Higher Education and Science of 2018 considerably restricts the internal autonomy of universities. Management is vested in rectors and university boards while neglecting the role of faculties, which, if established in the first place, have been reduced to entities of no significance. The rector, as the exclusive managerial body of an institution, and the university board, representing mainly external stakeholders, as a body supervising its economy, have been vested with such an ex-tensive authority that this may result in hindering the development of multiple academic disciplines, especially those in the area of the humanities, but also in the field of social studies in many cases.