For nearly eight hours, journalists at Media Narodowe TV were unable to enter their own editorial offices. Laptops, personal belongings, and clothing stored in the newsroom were out of reach, raising questions about the motive and legality of the actions taken by members of the Confederation’s circle. Michał Jelonek, a spokesperson for TV Media Narodowe, described the episode at a press conference held near the Sejm, calling the intrusion a banditry-like act by political figures associated with the Confederation party.
The newsroom disruption occurred after a visit that extended through the night, leaving employees unable to access a legally leased space for which they possessed proper documentation. Police arrived at the scene and were shown the rental agreements, yet access remained blocked for hours. The incident prompted the station to file a formal report with the prosecutor, detailing the trespass and the obstruction of work at the editorial office.
Jelonek recounted the situation as an affront to press freedom and newsroom independence. He noted that the equipment and private items held within the office were placed under the same protection as the station’s professional activities, and he questioned the reasons behind such forceful actions taken by opponents of the editorial line.
Journalistic Perspective and Contentions
In the days following the break-in, editorial staff recalled a recent agricultural forum during which an attack on Deputy Prime Minister Henryk Kowalczyk, the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, was claimed to have involved Confederation politicians. Tomasz Buczek, a figure within the party, was singled out in these accounts, described by some as presenting himself as a peasant while owning a construction and renovation business in Podkarpacie. Jelonek argued that the incident could be linked to attempts to obtain sensitive material from private laptops to cast the Confederation in a negative light, suggesting a broader agenda behind the disruption.
The councilor and editorial staff member emphasized the seriousness of the alleged crime and the need for a thorough investigation. He highlighted the presence of electoral representatives Witold Tumanowicz and Michał Urbaniak at the site, raising concerns about potential political interference in the media landscape. The assertion was made that the break-in constituted an illegal act and that those responsible should be held accountable under the law.
Responding to the accusations, representatives of Confederation rejected the claims. They stated that a notary was present during the opening of a cabinet committee and suggested that documents tied to a group known as Marsz Niepodległości were securely stored in a wardrobe, which had been accessed during the incident. The party’s spokesperson argued that the alleged burglary involved sensitive materials that were protected by journalistic secrecy and questioned whether the items were properly accounted for in the reported accounts of the event.
In the ensuing discussion, comments circulated about internal financial dealings within the March of Independence organization. Some voices claimed improper management, including the signing of proxies and the creation of self-serving contracts, while others defended the organization and its leadership. The debate expanded into broader accusations about governance and asset disposition within the association and its affiliated entities.
Several public figures weighed in with statements about the legitimacy of the association’s leadership and its headquarters. They argued that the current authorities had entered the offices, taken inventory, and acted within their rights as elected representatives of the group, dismissing the notion of a conspiratorial conspiracy behind the events. The exchange underscored a power struggle that has intensified as parliamentary elections approach, with observers suggesting that non-parliamentary tactics may not lead to broader reforms in the forthcoming term.
As the narrative unfolded, readers were reminded of ongoing coverage that framed the break-in as part of a larger debate over media independence, governance within advocacy groups, and the role of political actors in shaping newsroom access. The evolving story highlighted the tension between press freedom and political advocacy, signaling that further investigations and official statements would be necessary to clarify responsibilities and legal implications for all parties involved.
– End of article.