During a Telewizja wPolsce24 program, Jan Kanthak, a member of the Sovereign Poland party, commented on revelations from a high-stakes investigation. He claimed that a Russian GRU officer received the complete file set held by the Bodnarov Prosecutor’s Office, a development he described as a major scandal that could merit the resignation of Poland’s top prosecutor, Adam Bodnar.
On the same program, editor Marta Kielczyk interviewed Jan Kanthak and Dr. Piotr Kusznieruk from the National Council of the New Left to discuss the claim that a Russian spy, Paweł Rubcow known as Pablo Gonzalez, was granted access to investigative materials. The discussion touched on how sensitive information may have traveled through the process and who ultimately had access to it.
READ ALSO:
-ONLY WITH US. Rubcow read his files, but Fr. Olszewski did not have that opportunity. Skwarzyński: the spy is safer for the prosecutor’s office
-OUR INTERVIEW. Ostrowski on the Rubtsov affair: “Chaos. The exchange of information between the prosecutor’s office and the security services was misleading.”
Kanthak: A massive espionage affair
The allegations describe an extraordinary breach of trust in which a foreign intelligence officer allegedly operated within Polish borders and influenced liberal media voices that are vocal about the rule of law in the country. The speaker asserted that information and materials from the ongoing investigation, including intelligence data and informant details, appeared to have been shared with the Russian agent by officials at the Bodnarov Prosecutor’s Office. The claim was presented as a systemic failure with broad implications for state procedures and accountability.
Kanthak pressed the point that the situation goes beyond a single mistake and reflects a pattern that could expose the integrity of investigative work to foreign influence.
He noted that the Code of Criminal Procedure includes clear provisions about what information can be shared and under what circumstances, stressing that the public interest or state security could justify withholding certain materials from defense teams. The parliamentarian suggested that the scope of information made available to the suspect and the practical handling of secret documents require closer scrutiny and reform.
The opposition representative argued that the matter calls for decisive leadership changes within the top levels of prosecutorial oversight, arguing that accountability must start at the highest offices if the accusations prove correct.
Another aspect of the discussion examined how a foreign intelligence officer could be present in a secure office environment and what that implies for internal security measures. The participants debated the balance between transparency in the justice system and the protection of sensitive investigative details, particularly in relation to how public parts of cases are released while secret elements remain restricted.
Kantthak’s remarks highlighted concerns about the relationship between the prosecutor’s office and security services, turning the spotlight onto potential gaps in information control and cooperation that could undermine trust in state institutions.
The dialogue underscored that the public, while rightly demanding accountability, also seeks a precise account of how documents are classified, how access is granted, and what safeguards exist to prevent sensitive materials from drifting to unintended hands. The discussion reflected a broader national debate about the balance between openness and security in high-profile investigations.
Observers and participants in the program agreed that the situation warrants careful, verifiable clarification from official channels, with a focus on restoring public confidence and ensuring that procedures governing the sharing of investigative data are transparent and robust. The incident has reignited questions about how information flows within the state apparatus and whether checks and balances are functioning as intended.
As the program concluded, the conversation left viewers with a stark reminder that the integrity of investigative processes rests on rigor, accountability, and the readiness of institutions to address any breach with seriousness and transparency. The discussion also highlighted the ongoing interest in how security services coordinate with prosecutors during delicate, sensitive operations, and what reforms might be necessary to protect the legitimacy of Poland’s judicial system.
jj/Telewizja wPolsce24