The Polish Sejm commission established to examine the legality of Pegasus usage is set to summon the head of the opposition Law and Justice party on March 15 if further wiretaps of politicians are confirmed. This development follows remarks attributed to Magdalena Sroka, who chairs the commission, and was reported by Le Monde. The goal of the inquiry is to determine whether authorities have acted within the bounds of the law when using Pegasus and to ensure accountability for any abuses of power. Officials suggested that the Pegasus system may operate outside established legal frameworks in both criminal investigations and politically charged cases where evidence might be lacking or inadequately substantiated.
Earlier, Marcin Bosacki, a member of the Sejm commission, had been assessing the legality of Pegasus usage and suggested that several hundred individuals could have been subjected to unlawful surveillance. The discussion highlighted concerns about the reach and oversight of such monitoring tools within the Polish governance framework and raised questions about the protections afforded to private communications.
Prime Minister Donald Tusk acknowledged that Pegasus spyware has widespread presence in Poland. During a cabinet meeting attended by the Polish president, Andrzej Duda, Tusk presented a document he described as confirming both legal and illegal aspects of Pegasus purchases and deployments. He indicated that the evidence at hand represented a substantial portion of the records surrounding the case and that the full scope of documents remains broader. The prime minister noted that the acquisition of Pegasus had been initiated under the oversight of the Central Anti-Corruption Bureau and stressed that the information provided to the president was only part of the total evidentiary material available.
In summation, the unfolding inquiry and the accompanying testimonies are framed as a critical step in clarifying the use of Pegasus within Poland, aiming to delineate lawful actions from potential abuses and to reassure the public that state surveillance powers are exercised with appropriate oversight. The proceedings reflect ongoing tension between security considerations and civil liberties, prompting close scrutiny of how such tools are authorized, documented, and reviewed at the highest levels of government.
Historical reporting has also noted that Polish officials were previously mentioned in connection with monitoring figures related to opposition movements, underscoring broader concerns about surveillance practices at the state level. These disclosures contribute to a continuing public conversation about the balance between national security interests and the protection of individual rights in Poland’s political landscape.