Prosecutors in Poland are investigating the former head of the Central Bureau of Anti-Corruption (CBA) regarding the controversial acquisition and deployment of the Pegasus spyware system, raising further questions about surveillance practices under the previous government. The examination, prompted by a notification from the parliamentary committee examining Pegasus use, centers on allegations of abuse of power related to the purchase and implementation of the software, which is developed by the Israeli firm NSO Group [[1]]. The inquiry underscores a growing scrutiny of how the powerful surveillance tool was utilized within Poland’s security services and whether proper protocols were followed.
Polish prosecutors are investigating the former head of the Central Bureau of Anti-Corruption (CBA) over the acquisition and deployment of the Pegasus spyware system, a move that underscores growing scrutiny of surveillance practices within the country’s security services. The investigation centers on allegations that Ernest Bejda and others may have abused their authority during the purchase and implementation of the controversial software.
Magdalena Sroka, chair of the parliamentary committee investigating the use of Pegasus, announced Friday that a formal notification had been submitted to prosecutors concerning Bejda and others potentially involved. The complaint alleges a violation of Article 231, paragraph 1 of the Polish Criminal Code, which pertains to abuse of power by a public official.
Sroka emphasized that the notification wasn’t driven by political motivations, but rather the result of extensive work by the committee. She explained that the core issue is that the Pegasus system was implemented and used within the CBA without the necessary telecommunications security accreditation. Despite this, elements of the system were placed within the CBA’s protected zones – the most sensitive parts of the state’s infrastructure.
According to Sroka, this isn’t merely a “formal oversight,” but a “breach in the system for protecting classified information of the Republic of Poland.” The committee’s findings are supported by a review conducted by the Internal Security Agency (ABW) within the CBA, she said.
Dalszy ciąg artykułu pod materiałem wideo
Czym jest system Pegasus?
Kto złożył zawiadomienie do prokuratury?
Jakie zarzuty postawiono Ernestowi Bejdzie?
Co mówi Bejda o decyzji komisji?
The ABW, in a post-review report sent to the National Prosecutor’s Office, explicitly stated that the Pegasus system should have been subject to telecommunications security accreditation, but never received it, Sroka added.
Witold Zembaczyński, a member of the Civic Coalition (KO), stated during a press conference Friday that the committee’s notification indicated Bejda allegedly violated provisions of the Act on the Protection of Classified Information. Specifically, he cited Article 14, concerning the obligation to protect classified information by heads of organizational units, and Article 48, relating to the accreditation of telecommunications systems.
“In addition, the charge we are bringing against him is, of course, exceeding authority and failure to fulfill duties – referring to Article 231 of the Criminal Code,” Zembaczyński said. “That carries a penalty of up to three years in prison. But because this action was intended to achieve specific benefits, including political benefits, the prospect of imprisonment extends to 10 years.”
Bejda Calls Investigation a Political Game
Bejda dismissed the committee’s decision as part of an ongoing “political game,” telling the Polish Press Agency (PAP) that prosecutors would ultimately decide whether to formally charge him, as “this is a setup.” He claimed the committee’s actions suggest prosecutors may have already reached a decision on charges. “According to him, the committee’s proceedings are ‘prearranged, predetermined, and I will certainly receive this charge.’”
The former head of the CBA maintained that he acted as a public official, serving the state to the best of his ability while in office. “It was about carrying out tasks, ensuring that the service I led could fulfill its assigned tasks,” he said. “What political benefit is that? It’s a benefit for the state, because the state had the ability to effectively prosecute crimes.”
Bejda expressed his belief that the committee’s referral to prosecutors was “revenge” by those currently in power for the CBA’s “effectiveness” during his tenure. The case highlights the potential for politically charged investigations into the use of surveillance technology.
Documents from the Ministry of Justice show that Bejda was instrumental in the purchase of the Pegasus system. During testimony before the investigative committee in June, he stated that the system did not undergo the required telecommunications security accreditation procedure in accordance with the Act on the Protection of Classified Information, citing an exception outlined in Article 51 of the law. “The Pegasus system did not have to be accredited. It was not subject to the accreditation procedure. It was excluded from this procedure because it did not process classified information,” he said at the time. He added that Pegasus acquires, preserves, and transmits information – the three elements mentioned in Article 51 regarding the exception.
The parliamentary committee investigating Pegasus is examining the legality, appropriateness, and purposefulness of actions taken using the software by the government, special services, and police between November 2015 and November 2023. The committee also aims to determine who was responsible for acquiring Pegasus and similar tools for Polish authorities.
Pegasus is a system created by the Israeli firm NSO Group for combating terrorism and organized crime. With Pegasus, it’s possible to not only eavesdrop on conversations from an infected smartphone, but also gain access to other data stored on it, such as emails, photos, and videos, as well as cameras and microphones.
