Jarosław Kaczyński did not appear at the session of the parliamentary committee for regulations, parliamentary affairs, and immunities. His position was presented by Zbigniew Bogucki, who read a statement by the PiS chairman from a piece of paper. Below, we present fragments of this statement.

"I do not consent to being held responsible for the offense in the aforementioned matter [...]. The conduct covered by the motion was a justified reaction to the actions of Zbigniew Komosa. A political act by a person deeply in conflict with me, who has repeatedly violated the law and good customs."

"Distraction from the Extremely Reprehensible Passivity of the Police"

"The matter that is the subject of the motion can be seen as a distraction of public attention from the extremely reprehensible passivity of the police, who are unable or, worse, unwilling to act against the public excesses of Zbigniew Komosa, which violate good customs and the legal order."

"It is difficult to accept that parliamentary immunity should be waived in matters of the most trivial nature, and offenses undoubtedly fall into this category. [...] There is and cannot be consent for the persistent harassment or even psychological abuse of the families of the Smolensk catastrophe victims by Zbigniew Komosa to remain under the protection of law enforcement."

"The Motion is Legally Flawed"

"The motion is also fundamentally legally flawed. The object of protection under Article 124 of the Code of Petty Offenses is property, i.e., the integrity of items with monetary value. As a result of the actions attributed to me, no property has been damaged, and in particular, the market value of the wreath has not depreciated."

"The plaque or note attached to the wreath has no monetary value in itself; at most, it has some symbolic value, or in this case, a journalistic one [...] in the worst possible sense. Without the slanderous message, the wreath remained a fully-fledged wreath in terms of material goods, thus the elements of the offense under Article 124 of the Code of Petty Offenses were not met at all."

"My Act Should Be Treated as Justifying Circumstances of Self-Defense or State of Necessity"

"Even if, purely hypothetically, the aforementioned circumstances were disregarded, my act was a reaction to unlawfulness and should, at first glance, be treated as justifying circumstances of self-defense, as referred to in Article 21, paragraph 1 of the Penal Code, or a state of necessity described in Article 26, paragraph 1 of the Penal Code."