Before the parliamentary committee of inquiry on Pegasus, which the Constitutional Tribunal ruled illegal with the Constitution in September 2024, Aleksander Goszczycki, vice president of the Matic SA board, is identified as an intermediary in the Pegasus software procurement process.
Today the Sroka Commission, recognized by the Constitutional Tribunal as unconstitutional, planned to question two representatives from Matic SA, the intermediary in the deal to purchase Pegasus from the Israeli NSO Group for the CBA. At 10:30, Goszczycki faced the committee; the interrogation was scheduled to resume in a classified format at 14:00.
As Magdalena Sroka, chair of the PSL-TD committee, had stated earlier, the hearing of Matic representatives would focus on the Pegasus purchase. The second witness is Adam Chromiński.
A free explanation of the witness
Goszczycki appeared with a colleague during the session. He noted his long affiliation with Matic since 2013, during which he has overseen the defense sector and the deployment of IT solutions aimed at fighting crime and strengthening state security.
He described Matic as a specialized IT solutions integrator, working not only with in-house capabilities but also in collaboration with well‑established providers from around the world. The current Matic team numbers about fifty professionals.
In the security sector, Matic works for the police, the national public prosecutor’s office, the border guard, the Cyberspace Resource Center, and many other institutions active in this field. These contracts are secured through tender procedures, irrespective of the political leadership in Poland at the time.
He added that Matic is among the few firms offering specialized IT defense solutions that, in his assessment, directly contribute to the country’s safety.
Since 2011, Matic has held an industrial security certificate for handling classified information and, in 2014, obtained a concession concerning the handling of sensitive materials. This means the company has been consistently monitored by the relevant authorities, including the internal safety agency.
Secrecy clause
The vice president noted that he had only a very limited opportunity to speak for the committee, particularly during explicit questioning. He explained that information about Matic’s collaboration with MKBA falls under a confidentiality clause within the meaning of the law protecting classified information.
This mainly concerns the contract itself for the purchase and implementation of Pegasus, and the specific details of the collaboration. The only information that can be considered secret in this area is the MKBA’s designation of secrecy.
The witness stated that while the MKBA released him from the obligation to maintain secrecy, this was limited to circumstances related to the purchase of Pegasus software or similar software, and to related situations. He added that the release did not authorize sharing details about the forms and rules for operational and reconnaissance activities, or information and methods used in such activities, or information about persons involved, if obtained through state bodies or services and used in, or related to, security actions.
Aja/dad