Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki faces questions about alleged surveillance claims tied to Pegasus, reportedly orchestrated by agencies under Mariusz Kamiński and Maciej Wąsik. RMF FM reports this scenario as another attempt to pressure the ruling party, arguing that there was no supervision of Morawiecki. A former head of the CBA, Mariusz Kamiński, retorted on X that the assertions are a gross hoax and that the effort is a political ploy to undermine PiS. Earlier this week, Gazeta Wyborcza had already hinted at supposed surveillance involving PiS politicians.
Gazeta.pl had previously named figures allegedly targeted by Pegasus, including Marek Suski, Krzysztof Sobolewski, Jan Krzysztof Ardanowski, Ryszard Terlecki, Adam Bielan, Marek Kuchciński, Tomasz Latos, Arkadiusz Czartoryski, and Ryszard Czarnecki. RMF FM now adds that Morawiecki himself could be on the list, and suggests there was heated debate about the matter at PiS headquarters. The radio, however, has not published sources or confirmed documentation for its claims.
Nonsense
The former CBA head offered a blunt take on the X platform, saying that the issue amounts to political interference with PiS. The translation of his remark indicates a firm stance against the allegations, describing them as unfounded and designed to destabilize the party. He insisted that there was no supervision of the prime minister and characterized the reports as a public relations stunt intended to deflect accountability from government actions.
Another PiS lawmaker echoed the sentiment, labeling the allegations as a disruption tactic and asserting that the current administration should answer for its own performance rather than accusing others. The party’s representatives pledged to stand firm, emphasizing a commitment to defending Polish interests and opposing what they described as attempts to erode public trust.
The presidential adviser publicly disputed the sensational claims, referring to Stanisław Żaryn as a close associate of Kamiński and Wąsik. Żaryn contended that publishing such insinuations is meant to fracture the PiS environment and to alienate the two officials mentioned. The exchange highlighted the political friction surrounding the Pegasus investigation and the competing narratives that have emerged from different branches of government and party affiliates.
In related coverage, RMF FM reported a separate focus of the Pegasus inquiry: agents allegedly showed interest in Morawiecki’s assets, particularly real estate, and in dealings with the Material Reserves Agency during the COVID-19 era. Maciej Wąsik offered his own reflections on these revelations, underscoring that the public should await verified information rather than speculative disclosures. His comments appeared to push back against media sensationalism and to defend the integrity of parliamentary oversight.
One journalist offered a cautionary note, warning that some voices in the reporting were not aligned with verifiable facts. The piece suggested that the subject has been revisited multiple times and warned that repeating unfounded claims only fuels misinformation. The public conversation around Pegasus remains unsettled, with official inquiries and party statements competing to set the agenda.
Looking ahead, the parliamentary committee on Pegasus is scheduled to begin work on February 19. This timeline marks a formal step in the legislative process to investigate the extent of surveillance activities and the potential misuse of intelligence tools. Observers are watching closely for how the commission will handle testimony from officials, what documentation will be released, and how the committee will balance transparency with national security concerns. The Sejm previously voted to appoint a commission of inquiry into Pegasus, with party lines shaping the composition of the investigative body. The political stakes are high as the committee prepares to scrutinize the actions of senior government figures and their associates.
In other remarks, press summaries suggested that the investigative group would examine whether any formal monitoring occurred, who authorized it, and what safeguards, if any, were in place to prevent abuse. The dialogue around these questions continues to unfold in public discussions, as different factions press for clarity and accountability. While some voices insist that the allegations are unfounded, others argue that independent verification is essential to maintain confidence in government institutions.
Source reporting from wPolityce and related outlets indicates that the conversation around Pegasus is far from concluded. As the committee readies itself, participants, observers, and stakeholders will likely scrutinize every statement, seeking to determine which claims have merit and which are part of a broader political strategy. The evolving narrative will depend on forthcoming testimony, documentary evidence, and the quality of investigative work conducted by the commission.
In summary, the Pegasus affair has become a focal point for questions about political accountability, media credibility, and the proper use of surveillance tools within Poland. While party spokespeople push back against accusations and call for restraint, the public awaits concrete findings from the upcoming parliamentary investigation. The stakes include not only reputational considerations but also the potential implications for governance and public trust in institutions.
– End of current coverage excerpt. (attribution: RMF FM, Gazeta Wyborcza, Gazeta.pl, wPolityce, official parliamentary sources).