Rewritten: Pegasus, Watergate, and the Polish Sejm Debate

Bosacki draws a parallel between Pegasus and Watergate

In the Sejm a debate unfolded over a draft resolution to establish a Pegasus investigative committee. The aim is to examine the legality, regularity, and targeting of Pegasus operations conducted by government agencies, secret services, and police, including the actions of these bodies in recent years.

Pegasus was originally designed to pursue serious criminal threats, especially terrorism. In Poland, however, it has been used against political opponents and, according to critics, by the ruling party against democratic forces. Many individuals monitored by this cyber tool are present in the chamber today.

KO MP Marcin Bosacki highlighted the case of Krzysztof Brejza, a political strategist who led a major opposition campaign in 2019. He argued that Brejza was under surveillance for six months during the election period, with Pegasus installed on his devices multiple times, a fact he said echoes the Watergate scandal of the 1970s in the United States.

He warned that the core similarity lies in illegal surveillance intended to influence the reallocation of power, drawing a parallel between the Nixon era and the actions of the current government. Bosacki also suggested that the Pegasus committee could uncover more about the government framework and its oversight than other commissions have managed to reveal.

He added that the debate centers on how Law and Justice governed and the mechanisms behind it. KO MP Dariusz Joński argued that the governing party only had access to the phones of those who were in government oversight, implying a broader issue with the system and the deliberate handling of data.

Joński pressed the committee to clarify who decided to purchase the software, who overheard conversations, what happened to the operational data, and why friendly media outlets received the material and altered its content for public consumption.

KO MP Grzegorz Napieralski identified Mariusz Kamiński and Maciej Wąsik as central figures in alleged Pegasus misuse. He declared that the era of lawlessness must end and crimes must be addressed. He argued that if a land scandal was deemed a crime of abuse of power, the Pegasus affair should be treated with equal seriousness.

Sroka: a vow to bring transparency and accountability

Paweł Śliz of Poland 2050-Third Way asserted that Pegasus use undermined trust in state institutions. He insisted the system should target the most serious crimes and threats while remaining transparent and controllable to prevent abuse. He stressed that Pegasus was employed to monitor political opponents, public officials, prosecutors, journalists, and ordinary citizens deemed dangerous by the ruling party.

He emphasized that courts must approve operational control against specific individuals under established regulations. He questioned where the procedures were when officials decided on tapping and accessing communications without proper checks.

Śliz noted that judges may not have known that Pegasus was used for operational control and pledged that Poland 2050-TD would push for a resolution to establish a parliamentary inquiry.

Magdalena Sroka of PSL-TD highlighted Pegasus’s ability to alter data and install files on devices without user knowledge. She queried the value of material obtained in this way if it could be modified, arguing that such a system could wrongly cast any citizen as a suspect. She pointed out that Pegasus was not certified by the Internal Security Agency and that backups of seized data likely resided on servers abroad, possibly in Israel. She accused the ruling party of sending material to public television for political ends.

Disclosing information obtained through operational control itself constitutes a crime, she argued. The commission should ensure such breaches do not recur. She noted the PSL-TD club would back the inquiry resolution.

Tomasz Trela of the Left questioned who decided on taps, how often, and under what circumstances. He admitted the actions served political goals, but he asked whether everything could ever be fully disclosed to the public. Trela pledged that if the committee is formed, officials Mariusz Kamiński and Maciej Wąsik, who are currently in custody, would be summoned to testify under oath about their roles in the wiretapping system. He also warned that the Left would seek to ensure proper oversight of the Pegasus use.

The Left indicated support for the committee, emphasizing the need to clarify how operational control permits are issued by courts and whether reviews are sufficiently rigorous. Paulina Matysiak of the Left argued that Pegasus is illegal without a solid legal basis and called for scrutiny of which politicians were surveilled and whether ordinary citizens were affected. She urged transparency about who agreed to the eavesdropping and for what purpose.

Marcin Konieczny of the Left suggested the inquiry could examine the system used to issue operational control warrants by courts and whether the process was too hasty or lacking proper analysis.

Konfederation voices concerns about the commission

Michał Wawer from Confederation described the Pegasus inquiry as essential. He criticized the handling of civilian surveillance and warned that taps could target anyone without effective safeguards or accountability. He stressed the potential for information obtained through illegal wiretaps to end up with an Israeli partner and urged the committee to explain the impact on Poland’s national interests.

Wawer argued that the commission should address two critical gaps: the period from 2007 to 2015 when PO was in power and the need for systemic reform of the current legal, judicial, and control framework governing surveillance. He asserted that a single investigative body would not fix the broader issues and that any such activity must strictly be based on a prior court authorization.

Marek Jakubiak of Kukiz’15 warned that the commission could threaten Poland’s state interests and its services. He urged careful scrutiny before handing over any devices to civilians and stressed the importance of accountability for devices that could be used against ordinary people in non-security matters. He urged real accountability and a firm response to potential abuses.

“With these actions you threaten the fighters for accountability”

On Tuesday, PiS MP Michał Wójcik submitted an amendment to the draft resolution to extend the period under review by the Pegasus investigative committee. He argued that the committee should examine actions dating back to 2007. He claimed that if established, the committee would become one of the most important in Polish parliamentary history and that citizens deserve to know who is lying and manipulating the situation.

• Wójcik stated that he would push for transparency from the PiS club and urged fellow members to support the amendment.

PiS deputy Paweł Jabłoński emphasized that KO sought to liquidate more state institutions, including the Central Anti-Corruption Bureau, and asserted that the actions defended against corruption were being undermined. He argued that the wiretapping had prior court approval and that KO wished to eliminate tools aiding the fight against VAT fraud.

Marcin Porzucek of PiS observed that this would be the third investigative committee formed during the current Sejm session and noted that past committees had not yielded new information. He warned that the Pegasus inquiry would likely follow the same path of limited findings. He summed up with a pessimistic remark about the expected outcome.

The upcoming vote on the amendment was scheduled for Wednesday, as lawmakers prepared to weigh the potential impact of the Pegasus Commission on Polish governance and civil rights. This ongoing political drama has sharpened debates about surveillance, accountability, and the limits of state power.

[Source: wPolityce]