Pegasus. Will there be an EU commission? “PiS has deprived Poles of their sense of security. An oligarchy is emerging”

The use of spyware was on Tuesday (February 1, 2022) the topic of – partly by teleconference – meetings of the LIBE MEP (civil liberties, justice, internal disputes). The discussion focused on Poland and Hungary, because, as the Hungarian journalist Szabolcs Panyi, a victim and also a participant in journalistic investigations into Pegasus, explained to MEPs, there are no clear indications that this surveillance tool was, on a large scale, unlawfully abused outside these two countries.

– Polish courts do not have effective tools to control operational techniques such as Pegasus – explained today prosecutor Ewa Wrzosek, whose phone was infected with Pegasus, which was first confirmed by the manufacturer, and then by Citizen Lab. Wrzosek, which fell to the authorities, incl. for initiating an investigation into the would-be “envelope elections” of 2019, she emphasized in LIBE that there is now no possibility of explaining the Pegasus problem in Poland. – There are no objective control mechanisms. The superior of prosecutors is the prosecutor general, i.e. a politician who is not interested in clarifying the case. A Senate commission of inquiry was established, but it does not have any powers of power – this is how Wrzosek answered the Dutchman Jeroen Lenaers, who on behalf of the European People’s Party (EPP) was asking how the EU can help.

Will there be an EU commission of inquiry into Pegasus?

Róża Thun (Poland 2050), speaking on behalf of the “Renew Europe” faction, recalled that her club had already announced in January the idea of ​​establishing a European parliamentary inquiry committee on Pegasus. Such a postulate was also put forward today by Wrzosek, who also called for an EU legislative initiative aimed at regulating the subject of surveillance tools. On the other hand, Guerkan Oezturan from the European Center for Press and Media Freedom in Leipzig pointed to the need to consider EU export restrictions against companies selling Pegasus tools to countries violating civil liberties. – A growing problem is that such software is becoming cheaper and therefore more and more available. In the past, only a few, the largest intelligence agencies, could afford them. Now it’s more and more common – Oezturan warned.

In order to establish a committee of inquiry or a “special committee” of the European Parliament, you need a motion signed by at least 177 MEPs, i.e. a quarter of the entire chamber, and then the consent of the Conference of Presidents, i.e. heads of European parliamentary factions, whose voice – also when making such decisions – is weighted by the number of members of their MEPs. While there is certainly the will of the majority in the European Parliament to tackle the subject of Pegasus surveillance seriously (under any of the procedures available to MEPs), defining the detailed mandate of investigative and special committees is usually quite time-consuming. However, after that, expectations are also greater for the reports of such committees.

The investigative powers of the European Parliament are not comparable to those of the committees of inquiry in national parliaments, which – like parliamentary committees in Poland – have quasi-prosecutor’s investigative tools at their disposal. Also, observation missions, such as the one sent to Poland in February, have no firm authority to request information. And they are sometimes limited by the will of the rulers, who do not even have to agree to talk to envoys from the European Parliament. Also when it comes to elections to the European Parliament (not to mention the national ones), the EU institutions – even with concerns about violations of the law, e.g. during an election campaign – are completely doomed to have their integrity and validity confirmed by the national authorities of individual EU countries.

Pegasus’ censorship influence

EU Commissioner Thierry Breton – when asked about Pegasus – explained last week that while he wanted to help enforce fundamental rights, investigations into abuses using this surveillance software remain in the hands of EU member states. Despite this, the actions of the European Parliament regarding Pegasus would be another tool of political pressure not only on Warsaw or Budapest, but also on EU institutions and EU countries to deal more seriously with the issue of the rule of law, including in Poland. – Article 7 proceedings are pending against these two countries. We need to think about how to deal with surveillance in this procedure – said German Green Terry Reintke.

During the LIBE debate on Pegasus, no representative of the Polish United Right took the floor, and Hungarian MEP Balazs Hiveghi from Fidesz argued that there had been no illegal wiretaps in Hungary since 2010. – The PiS authorities took away the sense of security from people in Poland, entering their lives and the lives of their loved ones with shoes. Before our eyes, the PiS oligarchy is emerging! Such surveillance not only demolishes the personal lives of those intercepted, it also demolishes democracy itself – said Łukasz Kohut from the center-left S&D faction.

Today, Szabolcs Panyi pointed to the threat of Pegasus’s censorship influence. Interviewees of investigative journalists who deal with the scams of the authorities may increasingly avoid contacts with these journalists for fear that they will be tracked down and overheard by the services. – It is also depriving ordinary citizens of their right to privacy, since they can be exposed due to and during contacts with their lawyers who are under surveillance – explained Wrzosek.

The EPP group is planning a trip to Poland for the MEP delegation next week to talk about Pegasus. In addition, surveillance is to be one of the topics of the European parliamentary mission of the LIBE committee, which is going to Poland at the end of February. The issue is to be the subject of a plenary debate and possibly an MEP resolution in February or March.