Special Services

In response to the letter of The Senat’s extraordinary Commission, Minister Mariusz Kamiński clarifies the issue of special services eligibility to use operational control methods. ‘The need for such methods is obvious and understandable - every state must be able to prosecute perpetrators of crimes’- Mariusz Kamiński writes. He reminds that operational control in Poland is only ordered – upon the authorized service request - by court, with prior prosecutor’s approval.

The current approach of the politicians affiliated with the Civic Platform is seen by him as ‘a sign of hypocrisy and acting against the interest of the state’. Especially since the stories of people who are strongly connected to the Civic Platform are being used in attacks against the government of the Republic of Poland, those people are facing prosecutorial charges for criminal offenses. As he stresses, the state must be able to effectively prosecute complex criminal structures. ‘As the person responsible for supervising and coordinating the services entitled to combat crime I cannot allow the state to be helpless in this area’ – points out the Minister – Special Services Coordinator.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Below we publish the entire position of the Minister – Special Services Coordinator:

                                   Warsaw, 25 January 2022

Mr. Marcin Bosacki

Senator of the Republic of Poland
 

With reference to the letter of 17 January 2022, in which the invitation to the meeting of ‘The extraordinary Commission to clarify cases of illegal surveillance, their impact on the election process of the Republic of Poland and the reform of special services’ was forwarded, I present the following position:

The certain services which are dealing with combating crime in Poland have been authorized to use operational control methods. The need for such methods is obvious and understandable - every state must be able to prosecute perpetrators of crimes. In turn, as technology advances, the services must continually ensure that they develop their own capabilities in this area. According to media reports, a modern computer program that serves this purpose was going to be purchased in Poland in 2012 by one of the services which was authorized to exercise operational control. That service was probably using it at the time when Donald Tusk and Ewa Kopacz served as Prime Ministers, Bartosz Sienkiewicz and Marek Biernacki were the special services coordinators, and the services were led by the Civic Platform nominees. In subsequent years, the media presented the features and capabilities of this particular program in the same way as today ‘the Pegasus program’ is described.

The politicians affiliated with the Civic Platform party or even those who managed the services are now formulating baseless attacks aimed at government, claiming, that we are dealing with illegal actions. There are even statements saying that the so-called ‘Pegasus affair’ is a proof of lack of democracy in Poland. Such statements are untrue. Let me remind you that operational control in Poland is only ordered – upon the authorized service request - by court, with prior prosecutor’s approval. The insinuations that PiS government is weakening control over services and use of operational control are also baseless. Thanks to the changes made by the Law and Justice government the court control was tightened up in 2016 and the services powers have become more transparent. It is our government that adopted, even if only, regulations defining to which actions exactly the services are entitled when using operational control methods.

The impulse to establish the extraordinary Commission were the media rumors about one of the computer programs described as a tool used in the framework of operational control. In 2014 similar reports appeared – the media accused the Polish authorities of purchasing ‘total surveillance’ program (as reported by the media at the time) produced by Italian Hacking Team company. Such information though, based on Canadian CitizenLab company findings, were not used by the opposition at the time to formulate absurd insinuations against the government. No one even tried to use the reports about the alleged methods and ways of operational activity for political purposes, while the politicians – members of the ruling PO-PSL coalition did not deny these reports. All this shows that the current approach of the politicians affiliated with the Civic Platform is a hypocrisy and acting against the interest of the state. The public discourse regarding the  - used or not - operational activity methods is harmful for Poland and can lead to state paralysis in the fight against crime, including corruption, espionage and terrorism. In the current international situation, connected for example with growing Russia’s aggression against Ukraine or hybrid operation against Poland conducted by Lukashenko’s regime, such actions can be very dangerous for our country.

Current statements of the Commission members as well as the resolution which has appointed it, prove that the only aim of the action are the political attacks against the government. The resolution and the politicians who are sitting on the Committee talk about ‘investigation of illegal surveillance’, ‘impact of illegal surveillance on the electoral process’. In the meantime, there are no evidences of illegal activities carried out against anyone. There can be no such evidence, as every – I repeat every - case of operational control use by the Polish services obtains legally required approvals, including court approval. The court control is in no way a fiction. Courts, after receiving requests for operational control, have all the information needed to realistically evaluate them. They have also the right to ask for additional clarification if there is any doubt. Practice shows that these rights are repeatedly exercised.

The Commission, while presenting model cases of alleged illegal surveillance, focuses on Krzysztof Brejza and Roman Giertych cases. It is therefore worth noting some facts about these individuals.

The investigation about the activities of Roman Giertych is publicly known. The prosecutor’s office has decided to bring charges against him in the investigation of activity against the listed company. It is about leading to a massive 72 million PLN loss. Roman Giertych was to face further charges in this investigation, but he is hiding from the prosecution thinking he can be above the law. Krzysztof Brejza appears in turn in the investigation about the corruption case in Inowroclaw’s City Hall, including the functioning of so-called ‘hate department’ and illegal financing of election campaign of one of the parties. This investigation also concerns the use of public funds to combat political opponents of the Brejza’s family. The statements by a number of opposition politicians, who are mentioning the above mentioned surnames, are in the nature of manipulating public opinion. The investigations in which these individuals appear are strictly criminal cases.

The services in Poland are controlled by courts, prosecutor’s office and parliament. The parliamentary control is pursued, in accordance with the Sejm regulations, by the Special Services Committee. This Committee during the meeting held on 11 January 2022 dealt with the issue of operational control in Poland. The course of the Senate’s extraordinary Commission meetings,  as well as its members statements, show that your actions are in no way meant to explain anything. You are only focused on conducting anti-governmental campaign, a side effect of which may be – I assume you are aware of this - the paralysis of effective actions of the services responsible for crime combating. It is not without significance that among the first Commission witnesses appeared – beyond the aforementioned Krzysztof Brejza – also Krzysztof Kwiatkowski and Marian Banaś. Let me remind, that the former NIK chief Krzysztof Kwiatkowski has heard the prosecutor’s charges and there is a lawsuit pending against him in court. An important contribution to the materials of this investigation was the material obtained during operational control activities. The prosecutor’s office decided also to bring charges against Marian Banaś. Although he is protected by immunity for the time being, the prosecutor’s office intend to bring more than a dozen criminal charges against him. As you can see at least three witnesses are pursuing their own interests by ‘testifying’ in front of the Commission. It clearly impinges on the credibility of the entire Commission.

In many complicated investigations operational control methods are crucial for the actions of the judiciary. The case handled by the prosecutor’s office and CBA against Sławomir Nowak, the former prominent politician of the Civic Platform, shows, that the state is either able to effectively prosecute complex criminal structures, or must look on helplessly at the cancerous pathologies that engulf them. As the person responsible for supervising and coordinating the services entitled to combat crime I cannot allow the state to be helpless in this area. All the more reason for me to reject the so-called ‘Neumann’s doctrine’, which implies, in fact, consent to impunity for certain individuals because of their social and political connections.

In view of the arguments presented in this letter, I do not anticipate participating in the work of the Commission on any stage.

Mariusz Kamiński

Minister – Special Services Coordinator