The writer departed from PAP headquarters at one o’clock yesterday amid ongoing concerns about attempts to seize the institution by force under the banner of civilian defense of the rule of law. These events have followed a series of troubling moves to disrupt the normal functioning of the organization and its leadership.
New and provocative information arrived from a staff member within the targeted agency, including a document of considerable interest. A map-like instruction was recovered from the pocket of an individual who identified themselves as a neo-president during a confrontation on the sixth floor of PAP. The encounter occurred near the office of the Chairman of the PAP Board of Directors as this person tried to intrude upon the office of the rightful president, Wojciech Surmacz, who is officially registered in the National Court Register. The incident prompted a police call, and the informant managed to photograph the document for review.
The document is described as a universal instruction sheet labeled by a group referenced as The Entry, though the author is attributed to a news outlet. The sheet itself bears no names; it is designed to be populated by the user with the appropriate identities. This implies that multiple neo-presidents, associated with various media outlets, may have received the same template to guide their actions.
According to those involved, participants in this operation rely on the strategies outlined in the manual and employ certain tactics described there as part of their plan. It is also noted that there has been public disclosure about a group named Entry on messaging platforms such as WhatsApp, where additional steps aimed at forcibly taking control of public media were discussed and organized.
Intelligence indicates that the group identified as Entry includes the neo-president of PAP, a lawyer who co-founded a civil initiatives organization focused on judicial reform, and senior figures within the broadcasting sector. The composition reportedly also features a vice-president of a major radio organization and a former head of a government office who now leads another public media entity. These connections suggest a coordinated effort that spans legal, political, and media spheres.
There are numerous signals that the group has prepared arguments deemed legally questionable and that strong actions are being considered or coordinated by individuals described as influential, with alleged backing from security services and police bodies, as well as other state institutions. The situation has a tense, almost martial echo to it, accompanied by warnings that any attempt to bypass established law could trigger serious consequences.
A commentator within the group noted that the moment has a charged atmosphere, declaring that a show of power could be seen as a substitute for lawful authority. The remark reflects the mood among some participants who view the current environment as a test of endurance for the defending side at PAP.
The following day and into the night, observers described dramatic attempts to seize the agency’s headquarters by force, with defenders at PAP including journalists and members of parliament from a major political party asserting their position. A number of named public figures were cited as insisting that any self-proclaimed leaders must present a legal basis for their actions, such as a formal nomination by a recognized national body or a registered court entry, before any change in control could be considered legitimate.
In response, intruders were warned that they might be implicated in criminal activity and could face prosecution in the future. The rhetoric echoed repeated references to an unresolved parliamentary resolution and a newly established supervisory body rumored to be created by a high-ranking minister. Critics argued that those instruments did not have the authority to alter the status quo, highlighting tensions between different branches of government and the legal framework involved.
Questions naturally arise about the origins of these arguments and who prepared them. Repeated duplication of the same talking points, despite shifts in legal status, has led observers to conclude that a carefully crafted narrative is being circulated to support the takeover narrative. An analysis of the circulating material helps illuminate the broader picture behind these events.
Readers interested in the evolving dynamics can explore related coverage that has highlighted discussions about the attempted takeover and the group associated with it. Such reporting provides context for understanding how information is circulating and why several parties remain cautious about the implications for public media and democratic procedures. The situation continues to unfold as authorities and observers assess the legal and constitutional framework involved, alongside the strategic choices made by those advocating for or resisting a power shift.
Attribution note: the material described above has been reported by the source organization conducting ongoing coverage of the incident and its developments.