The European Parliament has set up a committee of inquiry into the Pegasus case. “It needs to be explained”

The postulate to establish a commission of inquiry to deal with politicians, journalists and activists using the system (and other similar spyware) was submitted in January by the macronist-liberal “Renew Europe” faction. And on Wednesday (February 9), during a meeting of the heads of MEP clubs, it was confirmed that this idea has the support of the required majority. A formal decision on the shape of the inquiry committee should be made next week. he will probably additionally support her in March in his resolution on the abuses of power committed with the help of Pegasus.

– There is support from the chairmen of the political groups. Today we present the mandate of this committee for approval. We need to explain the matter in depth and protect EU citizens from destroying their privacy – announced yesterday Róża Thun (Poland 2050) from the “Renew Europe” faction.

Commission of inquiry into Pegasus surveillance. Italy can help

The problem is that the European Parliament’s special or investigative committees have investigative powers (they can call for hearings) only in the case of investigating, for example, how the European Commission or other institutions work. On the other hand, outside this area, such committees are left with the voluntary cooperation of experts or representatives of the authorities of individual EU countries, who may or may not accept invitations to submit explanations to MEPs.

The subject of the committee of inquiry was raised today at a hearing organized in Brussels by the European People’s Party (EPP). – It is very important that a committee of the European Parliament undertakes cooperation with a national prosecutor’s office, because it would increase the possibilities of MEPs. Maybe the Italian prosecutor’s office will be interested in such cooperation? – advised MEPs Roman Giertych today, whose phone, according to an analysis by Citizen Lab, was infected with Pegasus.

Giertych convinces MEPs that the target of the Pegasus surveillance was Tusk, the head of the European Council

Giertych argued on Thursday in the European Parliament that the real target of his surveillance was Donald Tusk (Giertych is Tusk’s lawyer). – I believe that the Polish authorities were eavesdropping on the head of the European Council -. Pegasus in Giertych’s phone was to be installed right after Tusk informed him that he was changing the number and telephone, which – according to the patron – would make it difficult to follow the head of the European Council with less advanced methods. – So I was moved to follow him through my contacts with Tusk at a time when there was interest in Poland whether he would run in the presidential election – Giertych told MEPs in Brussels.

The Polish authorities keep repeating that there were no abuses with Pegasus (also in the case of Giertych). The Pegasus activity register on Giertych’s phone is to show that the surveillance program “logged in” also during his stays in Italy. Giertych told MEPs today that he is therefore filing a complaint with the Italian prosecutor’s office.

The European Union can take a look at the “Police Directive”

Bill Marczak from Citizen Lab assured MEPs that his center was ready to cooperate closely with the inquiry committee of the European Parliament. During the hearing, the impact of Pegasus (and similar programs) surveillance of journalists, politicians and activists on democracy was compared to the impact of radiation with radioactive materials on the human body. Even if the damaging effect is not immediately visible, it will show itself over time.

For the time being, in the EU, cases of Pegasus surveillance of journalists or politicians have been reported by Citizen Lab in Hungary and Poland. And in both of these countries, alleged victims of surveillance assert a complete lack of confidence in the prosecution service. Hence the questions as to whether and how the EU institutions can enter these issues with the help of legal tools. – We have to answer the question whether we are able to protect the security of democratic election processes and protect citizens. The authorities cannot abuse the surveillance systems, appealed today Andrzej Halicki (PO), co-organizer of the hearing.

Mate Szabo from the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union (HCLU) argued that while prosecuting abuses against Pegasus lies within the competence of national authorities, for example, the case of the surveillance of a Belgian citizen in Hungary using Pegasus suggests that the European Commission could approach this problem as part of the protection of EU freedom movement. – Security matters are a national competence. But the rule of law is also an EU right. Sometimes the European Commission needs to be made aware that it has the appropriate competences to act – said the Dutchman Jeroen Lenaers from the EPP group.

Today Halicki suggested that the EU institutions should take a look at, inter alia, application by Poland of the “Police Directive” (LED), which establishes exceptions to standard data protection requirements under the provisions of the GDPR. Among other activities very tentatively considered in the European Parliament is a draft EU law that would add a new “due diligence” obligation for phone manufacturers to address software vulnerabilities, including security updates. And also in terms of the proper deletion of sensitive data at the end of the life of the phone or other device.