Collaborators of Mariusz Błaszczak with allegations. It is about disclosing the “Warta” defense plan

The close associates of the former National Defense Minister Mariusz Błaszczak heard allegations in connection with the disclosure of fragments of the Polish Military Defense Plan “Warta”. As reported by the spokesperson of the District Prosecutor's Office in Warsaw, both Piotr Z. and Agnieszka G. did not admit to committing a crime.

Press spokesman for the District Prosecutor's Office in Warsaw Piotr Antoni Skiba announced that on Thursday at the Military Department, allegations were announced to two people who “at the end of July 2023, helped the former Minister of National Defense Mariusz Błaszczak to commit the offense of exceeding his rights to achieve personal benefits for his political formation – i.e. Electoral Committee 'Law and Justice'.

As indicated in the communiqué, it consisted in the abolition of the 'top secret' clause and 'secret' from fragments of strategic operational planning documents, including 'Plan to use the armed forces of the Republic of Poland Warta-00101 Independent defense operation of the main part' or the political and strategic defense directive of the Republic of Poland from 2015. ”

These fragments were added, “the minister published in the media – on the official profile of the 'Law and Justice' party on platform X, which acted to the detriment of the public interest and caused extremely serious damage to the Republic of Poland.”

They did not admit and submitted explanations

Skiba reported in a statement that “the court imposes a penalty for aid within the threat provided for for the authority, which means that both suspicious helpers are threatened with the same punishment as a direct contractor, i.e. the penalty of imprisonment from 1 year to 10 years”.

He reported, both Piotr Z., former director of the Department of Strategy and Defense Planning of the Ministry of National Defense and Agnieszka G., deputy chairman of the National Broadcasting Council “” did not admit to committing the accused of the crime and submitted brief explanations. ” “They refused to answer the prosecutor's questions,” we read.

The prosecutor's office “did not apply preventive measures against suspicious.”