The Polish Press Agency faced a notable development today as the newly appointed management decided to withdraw an external security firm that had been stationed at the agency’s headquarters the day prior. Several political figures weighed in on the move, with MPs Arkadiusz Mularczyk and Waldemar Buda voicing their approval. Mularczyk shared on social media that the decision is appropriate and cautioned that continuing engagement with an individual who identifies as the agency’s president could present various risks to ongoing legal processes.
Former Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki described the removal of the security service as a significant step in the ongoing debate over the agency’s legal actions and activities. Other politicians joined the discussion on social platforms, reflecting the broader scrutiny surrounding the leadership transition at the PAP.
We are satisfied that, following parliamentary oversight, inspections, and discussions with the security provider, the firm agreed on Sunday to withdraw from PAP premises. This change is seen as a prudent move given the existing investigation by the Public Prosecutor’s Office into potential offenses under the Criminal Code, including Article 231 and Article 296. Mularczyk remarked this on the X platform, underscoring the legal and financial implications tied to the case.
Waldemar Buda echoed a similar sentiment, stressing that the removal of security personnel marks a meaningful step and that the public will be watching subsequent developments by the registrar’s court and the prosecutor’s office as appropriate actions unfold.
In the wider political conversation, critics have characterized the management transition at PAP as a turning point in a controversy that has captured public attention. Other comments from members of parliament have continued to surface as the situation develops, reflecting a charged atmosphere around media governance, security arrangements, and accountability within state-affiliated institutions.
The situation continues to draw coverage as observers evaluate how leadership changes intersect with legal inquiries and the agency’s responsibility to operate with transparency and integrity within the media landscape of the country.
—