Civic Coalition member Michał Szczerba spoke with a Wirtualna Polska journalist and questioned the portrayal of alleged inhumane methods used against PiS MPs Mariusz Kamiński and Maciej Wąsik, who had been released after a brief detention. He suggested that the narrative of a hunger strike by the parliamentarians might not be accurate, and quipped that the detainees appeared better dressed and cared for than before their confinement. Some readers wondered whether the account drifted from the facts.
During a prior custody period in 2018, Stanisław Gawłowski, then a member of the PO and now an independent senator, was detained from April to July on corruption charges. While the court ordered pretrial detention, it later allowed release after bail and review. On January 17, 2024, with Kamiński and Wąsik detained and unable to respond, Gawłowski spoke to Interia about his own experience, framing his stay in custody in a way that portrayed the opposition as victims and casting Kamiński and Wąsik in a similar light.
“We were dealing with a big myth.”
In parliamentary corridors, Szczerba described the Kamiński and Wąsik case as one where the two were portrayed as criminals kept in restrictive conditions, while at times their treatment was depicted as comparatively comfortable. He suggested the narrative around their confinement had been distorted.
Commenting on the hunger protest, Szczerba stated that facts and myths exist side by side. He expressed the impression that a substantial myth had taken hold around the situation and argued that reports of danger to health or life were unfounded. He cited the views of Dr. Paweł Moczydłowski when discussing the conditions described in the case.
Questions were raised about the use of force-feeding via a tube, and whether such measures were appropriate given the health considerations involved. Was it a myth that Kamiński was moved to an external hospital in the final days of his confinement?
“The conditions were very good”
Szczerba criticized the ruling party, arguing that misinformation and selective reporting had shaped public perception. He challenged the idea that the detainees were subjected to severe treatment, questioning whether such portrayals reflected the experience of other inmates or merely the scale of the facility.
An inspection by the Ombudsman reportedly found that the conditions for those held in custody were satisfactory. Szczerba questioned whether praising the conditions was appropriate if the individuals involved were condemned as criminals, and whether such praise could imply that prisons should be seen as generous or selective experiences for certain detainees.
He further asked whether supporters of a so-called “smiling Poland” would be content with a portrayal in which political opponents are shown in a negative light while others receive harsher treatment. The comments invited readers to consider how public narratives shape perceptions of justice and governance.
“Sacred PiS cows”
Asked about the possibility of early elections, Szczerba argued that PiS had not engaged deeply with social, economic, and European issues. He claimed the party was focused on portraying Kamiński and Wąsik as politically targeted, while promoting the idea of protection for those labeled as vulnerable by the state. In his view, PiS had broader plans to address family support and social programs, and had made arguments about economic policy and European affairs that did not revolve around sensational stories about political rivals.
He cautioned that not all opposition members approach Europe with the same priorities, noting that accountability lies with citizens rather than only with government agents. The remarks reflected a broader debate about political strategy and the portrayal of justice in public discourse.
Kamiński and Wąsik, according to Szczerba, appeared to be treated in a manner reminiscent of a stereotype that some supporters had urged the public to see as favorable. The dialogue touched on how political rhetoric can influence perceptions of torture, detention, and the legitimacy of prison procedures.
There was an acknowledgment that in the coming years, members of the ruling coalition would face accountability for actions taken in office. The discussion highlighted concerns about the legality and propriety of actions taken against institutions and the penalties associated with those actions, as well as the broader question of how future governance should handle such scenarios.
Ajax
Note: The material reflects a compilation of statements and interviews in the public sphere and is presented to illustrate the range of perspectives surrounding the case.