Published: 17.12.2013
On 9 December 2013 Court of Appeals in Warsaw upheld a District Court judgment from 14th January refusing far-left politicians’ claims. They blamed the cross hanging in the plenary hall of Sejm (lower chamber of the Polish Parliament) to be an infringement of the freedom of religion and having an offensive character for them as for atheists. According to the Court, presence of religious symbols in public square e.g. in Sejm does not infringe freedom of religion neither may be considered as a personal offence.
On 14th of January 2013 District Court for Warsaw ruled that there was no infringement of personal interest of 7 petitioners who had claimed so. According to the plaintiffs their personal rights as MPs and atheists were infringed by the very presence of the cross in the main hall of the Parliament. They claimed, it has been a violationof their freedom of conscience and freedom of religion. According to the petitioners, the presence of a cross influences decisions made by Polish MPs. An attorney representing petitioners, said that Parliament favors religion by displaying cross which was not “universal sign nor sign of the Polish nation”. It was claimed that cross was placed in 1997 by a right wing MPs without any legal authorisation.
The Public Attorney (radca prokuratorii) representing Sejm said that religious symbol didn’t infringe personal interest and can’t be “the source of harm” (contrary to e.g. swastika).
Court dismissed lawsuit on the grounds that there wasn’t any infringement of petitioners personal interest. Whereas atheists in this given case might suffer certain personal, “discomfort”, according to court, in order to infringe personal interests, objective criteria, such as social assessment of specific conduct, are more important. Court emphasized, that vast majority of the Polish society did not consider the presence of the cross as a controversial issue. It even claimed, the long-lasting present of the cross in Parliament has brought it about a custom, which must not be disregarded by the Court.
The judgment has been subsequently challenged in the Court of Appeals in Warsaw.
On 9th December 2013 The Court of Appeals in Warsaw has upheld judgment as issued in January by the District Court refusing far-left politicians claims, as to offensive character of the cross in the plenary hall of Sejm. The Court emphasized, that religious freedom has not only a private, but also a public dimension. Therefore the display and appearance of the cross in public falls within the scope of permissible manifestation of a religion. Consequently, not every single subjective discomfort should be considered either as a violation of freedom of conscience and religion or personally offensive. It is because judgment could not be guided only by subjective personal feelings, but social context (customs, traditions, culture and historical experience of the specific community) must also be taken into account .
The petitioners announced, they will continue their efforts to remove the cross with a complaint to Strasbourg.
- According to polls, a majority of Poles support an increased legal availability of prenatal killing than the public has access to at present. This support fluctuates, however, depending on how a poll’s questions are formulated.
- Spanish authorities have banned public prayer, including the recitation of the rosary for the homeland. The decision is in response to mass protests by the population expressing opposition to the amnesty of Catalan separatists.
- States, by introducing legislation criminalising silent prayer, are violating the right to freedom of thought and conscience, which is a fundamental human right.
The Finnish Court of Appeal acquitted former Interior Minister Päivi Räsänen, who was accused of hate speech. The charge concerned a post on the 'X' platform (formerly Twitter) containing a passage from Scripture criticising homosexual practices and quotes from a publication issued in 2004 on marriage and sexuality. The criminalisation of speech through legislation on an undefined concept such as 'hate speech' has the potential to restrict the right to freedom of expression and thus poses a serious threat to democracy.
· The District Court in Kraków has dismissed IKEA's appeal against a judgment ordering the reinstatement of Janusz Komenda, an employee dismissed for quoting the Bible.
· In December 2022. District Court in Kraków found that the dismissal was unlawful and ordered Janusz Komenda to be reinstated.
· The Court of Second Instance confirmed that the dismissal was unjustified.
© 2016 ORDO IURIS - Instytut Na Rzecz Kultury Prawnej
