The editor of the Onet.pl portal, Bartosz Węglarczyk, cites the view of legal adviser Dawid Kulpa regarding a recent attack on public media. Yet the article does not specify the lawyer’s professional affiliations, a detail that matters when judging his potential impartiality as an expert witness in this debate.
Kulpa argues that beyond the constitutional order, there exists a separate framework guiding the state’s public discourse. He contends that in the current extraordinary context, Poland’s fundamental aim is to restore a democratic constitutional state, which includes safeguarding freedom of expression in public media.
Węglarczyk’s comment appeared on X, the social platform once called Twitter.
Comments from PiS MPs
Polish Law and Justice lawmakers weighed in on the exchange.
The post from @bweglarczyk apparently clashed with the party’s annual communications plan. Kulpa is described as a partner of a lawyer. Mikołaj Kozak, a political appointee of a ministry under a former security official, and Sienkiewicz, named chair of the Supervisory Board of PAP, are cited as examples in a claim of legal misalignment
– remarked MP Paweł Jabłoński.
If the claim that there exists a state interest beyond the constitutional order is taken at face value, some may question whether such specifics belong in public discourse at all.
– commented a former deputy minister of foreign affairs.
Radosław Fogiel echoed a similar sentiment.
One critic described the situation as a manipulation: a single lawyer’s involvement with Sienkiewicz’s activities, and another who crafts legal twists to justify media moves identified by the opposition. Both are partners, yet this detail seems to escape the editor’s attention, leaving readers to wonder about possible connections.
– noted a PiS member of parliament.
The piece suggests the head of Onet may rely on a relatively narrow information stream. The broader question remains about objectivity in reporting.
go/X
Source: a political opinion site