Testimony and Health Questions Surround Pegasus Commission Proceedings
The Pegasus Commission of Inquiry has been at the center of political debate as officials discuss whether Zbigniew Ziobro, the former Justice Minister, should be summoned to testify. Tomasz Trela, who serves as vice-chairman of the commission, spoke publicly about the matter on Radio Zet, asserting that if Ziobro is required to appear, the formal procedures outlined in the Code of Criminal Procedure must govern the process. Trela emphasized that the Commission should adhere to legal standards, ensuring that any contact with Ziobro follows due process and proper evidence handling.
During the radio appearance, Trela addressed whether Ziobro’s interrogation remained on the agenda despite the Sovereign Poland leader’s statements on social media describing a serious illness and sharing a hospital photograph. Trela reiterated his view that the demand for Ziobro’s appearance should proceed in accordance with established legal procedures, contingent on Ziobro being medically certified as unable to testify at the moment. He noted that if Ziobro is unwell, a medical certificate verified by a court-recognized medical expert would be sufficient for a temporary pause, but that the procedural path should begin without delay.
Trela declared that the health issue must not derail the Commission from its investigative duties. He stressed that he could not imagine a scenario where a minister who had held office for eight years, with serious questions surrounding the Pegasus project and a transfer of funds from a Justice Fund, would avoid testimony before the Commission. While acknowledging Ziobro’s health condition, Trela maintained that the inquiry should press forward, with care given to the minister’s medical status and the integrity of the process.
Trela also described a cautious approach to questioning at the patient’s bedside. He suggested that the Commission would respect the minister’s health situation and that the aim was not to press questions in a hospital room but to handle the matter through proper channels once Ziobro is able to participate. Trela stated, in effect, that recovery would take precedence, yet the investigation could not overlook its obligations to seek answers about the handling of funds linked to the Pegasus affair.
In recent weeks, Ziobro himself made a public post on social media detailing his health, reporting that he had undergone a difficult oncological treatment and a subsequent operation. The statements described the surgical removal of most of his esophagus and portions of his stomach, a stark reminder of the personal toll that illness can take and the complex interplay between political life and health.
Further context has come from members of Sovereign Poland who had previously announced Ziobro’s health status. The ongoing dialogue around the inquiry touches on questions of accountability for senior officials who may be implicated in the Pegasus project, including the transfer of funds and related governance concerns. The public discourse continues to evolve as the commission evaluates the appropriate procedure, timing, and the role of medical verification in preserving the integrity of testimony.
In related developments, coverage has highlighted the balance between legal obligations and compassionate consideration for a public official facing a serious illness. The discussion underscores the commitment of the commission to a thorough, orderly process while recognizing that health matters can influence the timing and manner of appearances before the inquiry. The topic remains a focal point for observers who seek clarity on how the Pegasus matter will be resolved and what accountability, if any, may follow for those in high office. The conversation is structured around ensuring due process, accountability, and transparency in a high-stakes inquiry that has drawn sustained public attention. (Source: wPolityce attribution)