The Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights has won the right to receive information on the communication and cooperation between Poland’s Internal Security Agency (ABW) and its American counterpart, the National Security Agency (NSA). Last year, HFHR joined Amnesty International Poland and the Panopticon Foundation in issuing 100 questions to authorities on the links between the ABW and PRISM, the security program run through the NSA and made public by Edward Snowden, after media reports began circulating about cooperation between the two organizations.

The questions and requests for information from HFHR went unanswered, prompting the lawsuit. The information sought is particularly important now, amid growing speculation that the NSA’s programs are larger and more complicit with European partners than previously thought. HFHR’s lawsuit also served as a barometer for the extent to which a democratic country is able control its own clandestine services.

In its ruling, the Voivodeship Administrative Court in Warsaw said that the Polish Constitution guarantees citizens the right to information regarding the actions of public authorities, including the ABW. Moreover, the judge reasoned that the sharing of such information is essential to building a strong civil society and a more transparent democratic system, and could find no national security interest in suppressing the information.

"The court pointed out that the information about the existence of agreements between the Internal Security Agency and the National Security Agency is public information, hence it should be granted to HFHR," said HFHR Vice President Dr. Adam Bodnar.

While the full scope of the relationship between the ABW and the NSA is still unclear, this ruling represents an important step in bringing transparency to the matter. It also underscores the fact that clandestine services may no longer be able to hide behind old statutes or national security arguments when refusing to share information about their activities.

"In the court's opinion, a citizen should be provided with a specific reason for refusal and on that basis should be able to identify the correlation between granting certain information and damage to national security," said Katarzyna Wiśniewska, a lawyer for HFHR.