freedom of speech https://en.ordoiuris.pl/freedom-speech pl The Italian ‘Zan bill’ poses a serious threat to the freedom of speech https://en.ordoiuris.pl/civil-liberties/italian-zan-bill-poses-serious-threat-freedom-speech <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: x field--node--title--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--node--title.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--title.html.twig * field--string.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--title--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> The Italian ‘Zan bill’ poses a serious threat to the freedom of speech <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--title--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * field--node--uid--aktualnosc.html.twig x field--node--uid.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--uid.html.twig * field--entity-reference.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field--node--uid.html.twig' --> <span> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'username' --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/user/username.html.twig' --> <span lang="" about="/user/116" typeof="schema:Person" property="schema:name" datatype="">filip.bator</span> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/user/username.html.twig' --> </span> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field--node--uid.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * field--node--created--aktualnosc.html.twig x field--node--created.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--created.html.twig * field--created.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field--node--created.html.twig' --> <span>czw., 07/01/2021 - 15:26</span> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field--node--created.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'links__node' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * links--node.html.twig x links.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/navigation/links.html.twig' --> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/navigation/links.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: x field--node--body--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--node--body.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--body.html.twig * field--text-with-summary.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--body--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm 0cm 0cm 36pt">• <span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><b>The Italian Senate held the first reading of the ‘Zan bill’ against ‘homophobia, lesbophobia, biphobia and transphobia’.</b></span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm 0cm 0cm 36pt">• <span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><b>The bill had been reviewed by the Chamber of Deputies since 2018, where it was adopted by the majority of 265 against 193 deputies.</b></span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm 0cm 0cm 36pt">• <span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><b>The bill poses a serious threat to the family, upbringing and freedom of speech by proposing severe penalties based on abstract definitions that detach sexuality from genetic and biological factors.</b></span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm 0cm 0cm 36pt">• <span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><b>The Holy See and Pope Francis officially oppose the bill.</b></span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">“The freedom to have a different opinion, engage in pragmatic disputes and confront ideas would be replaced with a penal tool to cut short any discussion. The experience of countries that have introduced such measures shows that they radically limit discussion on sexuality, marriage, family and upbringing and eliminate fully authorised opinions from public debate”, says Attorney Rafał Dorosiński, Director of the Ordo Iuris Centre for the Legal Studies.</span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">The bill, which sets out ‘measures to prevent and combat discrimination and violence based on sex, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and disability’ (number in the Chamber: <a href="https://www.camera.it/leg18/126?idDocumento=107" style="color:#0563c1; text-decoration:underline">C.107</a>, number in the Senate: <a href="http://www.senato.it/leg/18/BGT/Schede/Ddliter/53457.htm" style="color:#0563c1; text-decoration:underline">S.2005</a>), was brought to the Chamber of Deputies on the first day of its 18<sup>th</sup> term – on 23 March 2018 – by Deputies Laura Boldrini (elected on the same day as the Speaker of the Chamber) and Roberto Speranza. It is a repetition, with minor modifications and amendments, of the bill proposed on the first day of the previous term of the Chamber – on 15 March 2013 (<a href="https://www.camera.it/leg17/126?idDocumento=245" style="color:#0563c1; text-decoration:underline">print no. 254</a>). On 4 November 2020, the bill <a href="https://documenti.camera.it/apps/votazioni/votazionitutte/schedaVotazione.asp?Legislatura=18&amp;RifVotazione=422_41&amp;tipo=dettaglio" style="color:#0563c1; text-decoration:underline">was approved</a> by 265 deputies with 193 votes against and was forwarded for review to the Senate. On 25 May 2021, the Commission held its first reading.</span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">The bill consists of 10 articles. The first sets forth legal definitions of concepts related to gender identity:</span></span></span></p> <ol><li style="list-style-type:none"> <ol style="list-style-type:lower-alpha"><li style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm 0cm 0cm 36pt"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Sex (<i>sesso</i>) – understood as biological sex or sex registered at birth (<i>biologico o anagrafico</i>);</span></span></span></li> <li style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm 0cm 0cm 36pt"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Gender (<i>genere</i>, socio-cultural sex) – understood as any external manifestations that are in line with or contrary to sex-related social expectations;</span></span></span></li> <li style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm 0cm 0cm 36pt"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Sexual orientation (<i>orientamento sessuale</i>) – understood as sexual or emotional attraction to persons of the opposite or same sex or both sexes;</span></span></span></li> <li style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm 0cm 0cm 36pt"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Gender identity (<i>identità di genere</i>) – understood as one’s perception and manifestation of one’s own gender, even if it does not correspond to one’s sex, whether or not one has undergone transition.</span></span></span></li> </ol></li> </ol><p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">In addition, the bill amends Article 604-bis of the Criminal Code, which imposes the penalty of up to one and a half years of imprisonment or a fine of up to EUR 6,000 for propaganda and incitement to commit crimes for reasons of racial, ethnic and religious discrimination. The bill proposes to add discrimination and violence based on sex, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and disability to the existing list of crime reasons (racial, ethnic and religious discrimination). </span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">This way (by adding reasons based on sex, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and disability), it updates the Decree with the force of law of 26 April 1993 on the penalties for incitement to commit crimes.</span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Moreover, the bill:</span></span></span></p> <ul><li style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm 0cm 0cm 36pt"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">proposes a new national day to be held on 17 May – the National Day Against Homophobia, Lesbophobia, Biphobia and Transphobia ‘in order to promote a culture of respect and inclusion and fight prejudice, discrimination and crimes for reasons of sexual orientation and gender identity and ensure respect for the principle of equality and equal social dignity sanctioned by the Constitution’. This would not be a public holiday but an occasion to organise various events and initiatives;</span></span></span></li> <li style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm 0cm 0cm 36pt"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">updates the Decree with the force of law of 8 July 2003, obliging State authorities to develop a national strategy to prevent and combat discrimination for reasons of sexual orientation and gender identity (<i>strategia nazionale per la prevenzione e il contrasto delle discriminazioni per motivi legati all’orientamento sessuale e all’identità di genere</i>). The strategy is to be developed through regular consultation with local authorities, business organisations and associations that combat discrimination for reasons of sexual orientation and gender identity;</span></span></span></li> <li style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm 0cm 0cm 36pt"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">obliges statistical authorities to conduct every three years, having consulted the Observatory for Security against Acts of Discrimination (OSCAD), a statistical survey concerning acts of discrimination, also for reasons of sexual orientation and gender identity.</span></span></span></li> </ul><p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">One of the basic arguments against the bill is imprecision of the above definitions of <i>’gender’</i> and gender identity. These abstract ideas are put on a par with more specific concepts such as race, nationality or religion. Given the fact that the proponents of extending the concept of marriage to same-sex unions claim the affirmation of marriage and family to be ‘condescending’ and ‘discriminatory’, the bill poses the threat that persons and institutions whose opinions are contrary to those of LGBT organisations will be severely prosecuted under the Criminal Code.</span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Thus, the bill raises major concerns as to respecting the freedom of expression guaranteed both by the Italian Constitution and international treaties. Insofar as the reasons currently listed in Article 604-bis of the Italian Criminal Code are limited to concepts of fundamental importance for our civilisation - nation, ethnicity, race, statehood and religion - adding unclear categories coined by groups that engage in homosexual practices might significantly limit the freedom of speech. </span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Importantly, the Italian legal order already provides for a number of penal and other measures to prevent violence against anyone, regardless of their specific traits or self-definitions. They include the right to be protected against defamation and penalties for illegal threats and for violation of bodily integrity. In turn, under civil law one can pursue, inter alia, liability for damages.</span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"> </p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="line-height:115%"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">On 17 June 2021, the Secretariat of State of the Holy See issued a special note (<a href="https://www.vaticannews.va/it/vaticano/news/2021-06/testo-integrale-nota-verbale-segreteria-stato-ddl-zan.html" style="color:#0563c1; text-decoration:underline"><i>Nota Verbale</i></a>) to the Italian Government claiming that the bill in its current form contradicts Articles 2.1 and 2.3 of the Concordat between Italy and the Holy See of 18 February 1984, which guarantees full freedom for the Catholic Church to fulfil its pastoral, educational and charity mission as well as full freedom of expression for believers and their associations. In <a href="https://www.ilmessaggero.it/vaticano/ddl_zan_vaticano_cardinale_re_papa_francesco_draghi_omosessualita_governo_pd_letta_news-6040966.html" style="color:#0563c1; text-decoration:underline">an interview on 24 June,</a> Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, Dean of the College of Cardinals, confirmed that Pope Francis had approved the full text of the Note.</span></span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify; margin:0cm"> </p> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--body--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: x field--node--field-kategoria--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--node--field-kategoria.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--field-kategoria.html.twig * field--entity-reference.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--field-kategoria--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> Kategoria } <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--field-kategoria--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: x field--node--field-zdjecie--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--node--field-zdjecie.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--field-zdjecie.html.twig * field--image.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--field-zdjecie--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'image_formatter' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * image-formatter--node--aktualnosc--field-zdjecie.html.twig x image-formatter.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image-formatter.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'image_style' --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image-style.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'image' --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image.html.twig' --> <img src="/sites/default/files/styles/artykul_full/public/2021-07/AdobeStock_43839039.jpeg?itok=9sb7itQi" width="250" height="125" alt="" typeof="foaf:Image" /> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image.html.twig' --> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image-style.html.twig' --> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image-formatter.html.twig' --> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--field-zdjecie--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * field--node--field-zrodlo-zdjecia--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--node--field-zrodlo-zdjecia.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--field-zrodlo-zdjecia.html.twig * field--string.html.twig x field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field.html.twig' --> <div>Adobe Stock</div> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * field--node--field-tagi--aktualnosc.html.twig x field--node--field-tagi.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--field-tagi.html.twig * field--entity-reference.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/page_node/field--node--field-tagi.html.twig' --> <hr> <ul class="tags_list"> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/italia" hreflang="pl">italia</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/zan-bill" hreflang="pl">zan bill</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/lgbt" hreflang="pl">LGBT</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/homophobia" hreflang="pl">homophobia</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/ordo-iuris" hreflang="pl">Ordo Iuris</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/freedom-speech" hreflang="pl">freedom of speech</a></li> </ul> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/page_node/field--node--field-tagi.html.twig' --> Thu, 01 Jul 2021 13:26:37 +0000 filip.bator 1212 at https://en.ordoiuris.pl An analysis of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) judgement of 14 January 2020 in the case of Beizaras and Levickas v. Lithuania https://en.ordoiuris.pl/civil-liberties/analysis-european-court-human-rights-echr-judgement-14-january-2020-case-beizaras <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: x field--node--title--analiza-prawna.html.twig * field--node--title.html.twig * field--node--analiza-prawna.html.twig * field--title.html.twig * field--string.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/analyses_block/field--node--title--analiza-prawna.html.twig' --> An analysis of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) judgement of 14 January 2020 in the case of Beizaras and Levickas v. Lithuania <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/analyses_block/field--node--title--analiza-prawna.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * field--node--uid--analiza-prawna.html.twig x field--node--uid.html.twig * field--node--analiza-prawna.html.twig * field--uid.html.twig * field--entity-reference.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field--node--uid.html.twig' --> <span> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'username' --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/user/username.html.twig' --> <span lang="" about="/user/116" typeof="schema:Person" property="schema:name" datatype="">filip.bator</span> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/user/username.html.twig' --> </span> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field--node--uid.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * field--node--created--analiza-prawna.html.twig x field--node--created.html.twig * field--node--analiza-prawna.html.twig * field--created.html.twig * field--created.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field--node--created.html.twig' --> <span>czw., 02/13/2020 - 13:43</span> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field--node--created.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'links__node' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * links--node.html.twig x links.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/navigation/links.html.twig' --> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/navigation/links.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: x field--node--body--analiza-prawna.html.twig * field--node--body.html.twig * field--node--analiza-prawna.html.twig * field--body.html.twig * field--text-with-summary.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/analyses_block/field--node--body--analiza-prawna.html.twig' --> <p style="margin-top:0cm; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">Factual circumstances</span></span></b></span></span></p> <p style="margin-top:0cm; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">The case of Beizaras and Levickas v. Lithuania concerns a homosexual couple, two activists of a Lithuanian LGBT non-governmental organisation called Lietuvos Gėjų Lyga (LGL Association), who had posted a photograph on Facebook depicting their romantic kiss. Their picture received 800 comments, 31 of which contained aggressive and vulgar remarks addressing both men, such as: "If I was allowed to, I would shoot every single one of them”, “Burn in hell”, “Into the gas chamber with the pair of them”, “You should be exterminated”, “I’ll buy you a free honeymoon trip to the crematorium”, and “It’s not only the Jews that Hitler should have burned”. In the name of the couple, LGL Association reported a crime of incitement to violence and hate to the Prosecutor General's Office. The Prosecutor's Office took the decision not to initiate the investigation, claiming that although the behaviour of the authors of the comments was immoral, it was not of a criminal nature, given that the Internet users solely expressed their opinion about homosexual people with no intention of inciting violence or hatred. The decision of the Prosecutor's Office was upheld by the courts, which emphasised that the homosexual couple deliberately posted their photo as public, addressing it not only to their like-minded friends, but to the entire Facebook community. In the opinion of the courts, such an action could therefore be interpreted as constituting “an attempt to deliberately tease or shock individuals with different views”. As both men subsequently admitted, the goal of making their photo public and disseminating it was to “provoke a discussion on gay rights in Lithuania”.</span></span></b></span></span></p> <p style="margin-top:0cm; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><u><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">Judgement of the European Court of Human Rights</span></span></u></span></span></p> <p style="margin-top:0cm; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, to which the complaint was lodged by both men, did not share the position of the Lithuanian courts. The Court found it clear that comments on Facebook page affected the applicants’ “psychological well-being and dignity” (§117). The Court also noted that the quoted comments under the posted picture cannot be considered only as unethical, since some of them directly called for violence (§125, 152–154).</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="margin-top:0cm; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">In the course of this case, the Court made several comments of a general nature. The Court stated that exercising the right to free speech in an “irresponsible manner”, as exemplified by the “homophobic hate speech”, may require the state to pursue specific, positive actions for the criticised social group (§125). In the assessment of the Court, hate speech is not only incitement to violence, but also an expression of a broadly understood “hate” consisting in an “attack on the mental integrity” of other people – the most serious forms of such conceived hate speech require protection by the criminal law (§128). In this case, the state failed to fulfil the obligation of protecting the “mental integrity” of the complainants against hateful comments on account of the “discriminatory state of mind” of the relevant public authorities responsible for carrying out the investigation (§129).</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="margin-top:0cm; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">For these reasons, the Court found that the complainants’ rights to respect for their private life, and the right to non-discrimination have been infringed (Article 8 and Article 14 of the Convention).</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="margin-top:0cm; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><u><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">Commentary:</span></span></u></span></span></p> <p style="margin-top:0cm; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">1. The sole recognition of infringement of the complainants’ rights to the protection of their private life in principle does not raise doubts. The right to privacy in the case law of the ECHR of Strasbourg, due to the lack in the European Convention of Human Rights of an equivalent of the right to the protection of health and the right to personal inviolability, was for a long time widely interpreted not only as the entitlement to autonomy of information in the scope of human privacy and intimacy, but also as the integrity of physical and psychological human rights, which involves a positive obligation of the state to defend individuals against unlawful acts of violence on the part of third parties</span></span><a name="_ftnref1" id="_ftnref1"></a><a href="#_ftn1"><sup><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"><span style="color:#0563c1">[1]</span></span></span></sup></a><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">. In the present case, it was indisputable that the applicants were recipients of comments wishing them death, and the prosecutor refused to take any remedial steps. The state has failed to fulfil the obligation to defend the applicants from the threat of acts of violence.</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="margin-top:0cm; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">2. However, the justification of the decision of the Court must be assessed critically. The complaint deserved to be taken into account because Lithuania refused the legal protection of two men against clear threats of violence, who should be protected in the same way as all other citizens and not because – as it follows from justification of the ruling – that their “mental well-being” has suffered in connection with being homosexual. It is clear that the public debate on socially important topics involves the disturbance of the mental well-being of some of the people, usually without presenting any risks to their life and health. This is, however, not a reason to prohibit such debates. On the contrary, the freedom of expression, enshrined in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, should as a rule also protect expressions causing emotional discomfort to adversaries.</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="margin-top:0cm; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">3. It should be stressed that beyond any doubt, expressions inciting violence against any person do not benefit from protection of the right under the freedom of expression and should be subject to strict sanctions. Expressions inciting violence, containing punishable threats, promoting totalitarian ideologies were always – and rightly – recognised in the case law of the Court in Strasbourg as an abuse of the right to freedom of expression</span></span><a name="_ftnref2" id="_ftnref2"></a><a href="#_ftn2"><sup><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"><span style="color:#0563c1">[2]</span></span></span></sup></a><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">. Sometimes, such statements are referred to as so-called hate speech.</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="margin-top:0cm; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">4. Hate speech is not a legal concept, but is a product of international juridical science and case law. In international law, the concept of hatred exists, which appeared for the first time in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1966 (ICCPR). The prohibition of propaganda for war was formulated in Article 20 of the ICCPR (paragraph 1), as well as the prohibition of any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes an incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence (paragraph 2). The purpose of introducing legal solutions, which would sanction extreme and hateful attitudes towards specific social groups, was to prevent the repetition of crimes led by German Nazism, whose ideological foundation was based, inter alia, on hatred towards other national, racial and ethnic groups</span></span><a name="_ftnref3" id="_ftnref3"></a><a href="#_ftn3"><sup><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"><span style="color:#0563c1">[3]</span></span></span></sup></a><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">. The second prohibition was introduced at the initiative of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics which, in its first proposal submitted in 1947, called for the criminalisation of any act “promoting any hostility, hatred or contempt” and all acts of “privilege or discrimination” of a national, racial or religious character</span></span><a name="_ftnref4" id="_ftnref4"></a><a href="#_ftn4"><sup><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"><span style="color:#0563c1">[4]</span></span></span></sup></a><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">. In the course of the debate, a representative of Great Britain pointed out that this proposal does not provide for the protection of an individual against discrimination based on political views. In response to this allegation, a representative of the USSR replied that proclaiming “political views supporting racial or national hatred and actions resulting from this hatred” should be deprived of legal protection. When a representative of Chile asked whether this means that the Soviet Union advocates the persecution of an individual because of their political views, the representative of the USSR refused to reply, indicating that this question is not related to the subject of discussion. The first proposition to introduce a prohibition of the spread of hatred was then rejected</span></span><a name="_ftnref5" id="_ftnref5"></a><a href="#_ftn5"><sup><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"><span style="color:#0563c1">[5]</span></span></span></sup></a><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">. The discussion over the postulate of the USSR was revisited in the subsequent years thanks to the countries cooperating with the Soviets, which were making analogous proposals. In the 1950s, the majority of countries participating in the work on the draft of the Pact rejected the successive versions of the prohibition of incitement to hatred, because of the ambiguity of this term and a concern that it will be used to restrict freedom of expression</span></span><a name="_ftnref6" id="_ftnref6"></a><a href="#_ftn6"><sup><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"><span style="color:#0563c1">[6]</span></span></span></sup></a><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">. In 1961, a representative of the United States explained that such a solution “opens the door to abuses”, and its entry into force “could be used by the governments of totalitarian countries to impose restrictions on freedom of expression and freedom of the press.” In fact, “any criticism addressed to public or religious authorities can easily be treated as an “incitement to hatred”</span></span><a name="_ftnref7" id="_ftnref7"></a><a href="#_ftn7"><sup><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"><span style="color:#0563c1">[7]</span></span></span></sup></a><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">. Similar doubts were shared e.g. by a representative of Japan, indicating the difficulty to define the concept of hatred: “each government could refer to such provisions [formulating a prohibition of incitement to hatred] to justify authoritarian control over all forms of expression, and suppress any unfavourable views, under the pretext of the fight against any incitement to hatred and violence<a name="_ftnref8" id="_ftnref8">”</a></span></span><a href="#_ftn8"><sup><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"><span style="color:#0563c1">[8]</span></span></span></sup></a><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">.</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="margin-top:0cm; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">Despite these doubts, an entry to art. 20(2) of the Pact was finally passed, which prohibited “encouraging in any way national, racial or religious hatred, which constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or rape”, without imposing on the countries an obligation to penalise the so-called hate speech. The prohibition of incitement to hatred was adopted by a majority of 50 to 18 votes, mainly with the support of the Soviet bloc countries and the countries of an authoritarian regime (including, among others, the Soviet Union, Albania, Hungary, Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates), with the opposition of democratic countries of the western block (including, among others, the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, and the Netherlands)</span></span><a name="_ftnref9" id="_ftnref9"></a><a href="#_ftn9"><sup><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"><span style="color:#0563c1">[9]</span></span></span></sup></a><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">. Taking into account the historical context of the emergence of Article 20(2) of the ICCPR, the concept of a prohibition of incitement to hatred of a race, national or religious character must be interpreted strictly as actions having as an objective to provoke violence in a closer or further perspective. Therefore, the concept of so-called hate speech should be interpreted more conservatively, as its prohibition was not expressed in any common international legal act. The authors of the Pact have rightly noticed threats in too broad a meaning of “hate” to the fundamental values in Democratic reality, which is the freedom of expression.</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="margin-top:0cm; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify"> </p> <p style="margin-top:0cm; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">5. According to a classic definition, so-called hate speech is public statements encouraging violence against persons or groups of persons due to a specific personal feature, such as race, religion, or gender</span></span><a name="_ftnref10" id="_ftnref10"></a><a href="#_ftn10"><sup><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"><span style="color:#0563c1">[10]</span></span></span></sup></a><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">. In recent years, this concept has gradually expanded - in many countries and also in the case law of international institutions (such as the Secretary General of the United Nations</span></span><a name="_ftnref11" id="_ftnref11"></a><a href="#_ftn11"><sup><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"><span style="color:#0563c1">[11]</span></span></span></sup></a><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">, the European Parliament</span></span><a name="_ftnref12" id="_ftnref12"></a><a href="#_ftn12"><sup><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"><span style="color:#0563c1">[12]</span></span></span></sup></a><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe</span></span><a name="_ftnref13" id="_ftnref13"></a><a href="#_ftn13"><sup><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"><span style="color:#0563c1">[13]</span></span></span></sup></a><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">, and the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance), hate speech is not only an expression inciting violence and containing punishable threats, but any kind of expression that could cause psychological discomfort of a person criticised for reasons of a specific personal feature - e.g. sexual orientation. At the same time, it is more and more often postulated to penalise expressions constituting hate speech in a broad sense. The European Court of Human Rights in the case of Beizaras and Levickas headed in a similar direction.</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="margin-top:0cm; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">6. It is one thing to penalise statements posing a threat to the life and health of other persons, while it is quite another to make people criminally liable for statements criticising the lifestyle of others. In the first case, the criminal law protects the highest values (the right to life and the right to respect for physical integrity), in the second case, it protects the values situated lower in the hierarchy of legal interests: the good name, privacy, and well-being of persons being subject to criticism.</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="margin-top:0cm; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">7. The extension of the definition of hate speech and the progressive range of criminal penalties results in a severe limitation of freedom of expression, which – according to the golden rule expressed in the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights in the famous case of Handyside, cited also in the contemporary <a name="_ftnref14" id="_ftnref14">case law</a></span></span><a href="#_ftn14"><sup><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"><span style="color:#0563c1">[14]</span></span></span></sup></a><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"> – includes not only the right to present information and express views that are being received favourably, considered as inoffensive and neutral, but also the right to expression that is offensive, outrages or introduces anxiety in a state or in a part of society.</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="margin-top:0cm; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">8. In its essence, freedom of expression also entails criticising behaviours of specific social groups, which include people sexually attracted to persons of the same sex. It should be noted that there is an important difference between criticising someone's belonging to a particular race, nation, or gender and someone's sexual preferences (so-called sexual orientation). Insofar as belonging to a particular race, nation, or gender is completely independent of human will, sexual preferences are a matter of free choice, which is often said by homosexual people</span></span><a name="_ftnref15" id="_ftnref15"></a><a href="#_ftn15"><sup><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"><span style="color:#0563c1">[15]</span></span></span></sup></a><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">. If a given man prefers sexual contacts with people of the same sex and gladly manifests this preference to the public (e.g. on Facebook), he should realise that he will face the criticism of people who consider this type of behaviour to be immoral. The freedom of expression in this case involves religious freedom, since the three great monotheistic religions practised by the majority of the world population – Christianity, Judaism and Islam – recognise homosexual behaviour as morally ignoble. We may of course not agree with such beliefs, but we cannot strictly prohibit their proclamation. As LGBT persons have the right to present homosexuality as a completely natural tendency deserving approval and respect, Christians, Jews, Muslims and others should also have the possibility to recognise homosexuality as a deviation, and homosexual behaviours as immoral. Of course, the freedom to criticise unconventional sexual preferences is not unlimited – at the moment, when the criticism begins to be accompanied by punishable threats or incitement to violence against LGBT persons, the state should present a strong response in the form of penal sanction. This applies to all social groups, not only LGBT – each human should be protected by the state against unlawful acts of violence or acts inciting violence against him or her.</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="margin-top:0cm; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">9. Therefore, the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Beizaras and Levickas v. Lithuania deserves to be criticised because it uses an extreme case of making punishable threats addressed to other people as a pretext to formulate a postulate of prosecuting by the state of all critical expressions toward homosexual lifestyle, causing psychological discomfort of LGBT people.</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="margin-top:0cm; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0cm; text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">Author: Paweł M. Łukaszewski</span></span></span></span></p> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/analyses_block/field--node--body--analiza-prawna.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: x field--node--field-zdjecie2--analiza-prawna.html.twig * field--node--field-zdjecie2.html.twig * field--node--analiza-prawna.html.twig * field--field-zdjecie2.html.twig * field--image.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/analyses_block/field--node--field-zdjecie2--analiza-prawna.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'image_formatter' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * image-formatter--node--analiza-prawna--field-zdjecie2.html.twig x image-formatter.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image-formatter.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'image_style' --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image-style.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'image' --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image.html.twig' --> <img src="/sites/default/files/styles/artykul_full/public/2020-02/AdobeStock_51362090.jpeg?itok=0rGYgeaQ" width="250" height="125" alt="" typeof="foaf:Image" /> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image.html.twig' --> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image-style.html.twig' --> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image-formatter.html.twig' --> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/analyses_block/field--node--field-zdjecie2--analiza-prawna.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: x field--node--field-kategoria--analiza-prawna.html.twig * field--node--field-kategoria.html.twig * field--node--analiza-prawna.html.twig * field--field-kategoria.html.twig * field--entity-reference.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/analyses_block/field--node--field-kategoria--analiza-prawna.html.twig' --> Civil liberties <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/analyses_block/field--node--field-kategoria--analiza-prawna.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * field--node--field-tagi--analiza-prawna.html.twig x field--node--field-tagi.html.twig * field--node--analiza-prawna.html.twig * field--field-tagi.html.twig * field--entity-reference.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/page_node/field--node--field-tagi.html.twig' --> <hr> <ul class="tags_list"> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/lithuania" hreflang="pl">lithuania</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/ordo-iuris" hreflang="pl">Ordo Iuris</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/tribunal" hreflang="pl">Tribunal</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/human-rights" hreflang="pl">human rights</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/lgbt" hreflang="pl">LGBT</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/freedom-speech" hreflang="pl">freedom of speech</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/hate-speech" hreflang="pl">hate speech</a></li> </ul> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/page_node/field--node--field-tagi.html.twig' --> Thu, 13 Feb 2020 12:43:27 +0000 filip.bator 1040 at https://en.ordoiuris.pl Ordo Iuris in a battle against censorship on the Internet. There will be a lawsuit against Google https://en.ordoiuris.pl/wolnosci-obywatelskie/ordo-iuris-battle-against-censorship-internet-there-will-be-lawsuit-against <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: x field--node--title--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--node--title.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--title.html.twig * field--string.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--title--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> Ordo Iuris in a battle against censorship on the Internet. There will be a lawsuit against Google <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--title--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * field--node--uid--aktualnosc.html.twig x field--node--uid.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--uid.html.twig * field--entity-reference.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field--node--uid.html.twig' --> <span> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'username' --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/user/username.html.twig' --> <span lang="" about="/user/116" typeof="schema:Person" property="schema:name" datatype="">filip.bator</span> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/user/username.html.twig' --> </span> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field--node--uid.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * field--node--created--aktualnosc.html.twig x field--node--created.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--created.html.twig * field--created.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field--node--created.html.twig' --> <span>wt., 11/19/2019 - 16:43</span> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field--node--created.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'links__node' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * links--node.html.twig x links.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/navigation/links.html.twig' --> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/navigation/links.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: x field--node--body--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--node--body.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--body.html.twig * field--text-with-summary.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--body--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> <p style="margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">The lawyers of the Ordo Iuris Institute have filed a lawsuit against Google on behalf of Paweł Lisicki. The reason is that the programmes run by the journalist are described as allegedly spreading "hate speech". The TV channel wSensie.tv, where the programmes appeared, was previously blocked by the YouTube platform. This is one of many cases of censorship of Catholic and conservative content by the administration of social network portals.</span></span></b></span></span></p> <p style="margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"> </p> <p style="margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">The removal of two episodes of the 'Wierzę' programme by Paweł Lisicki and Marek Miśko took place in August this year. The programmes presented the teaching of the Church on the ideology of the LGBT movement. According to the administration of the portal, they allegedly spread "hate speech". The channel wSensie.tv was blocked, initially for three months. The possibility of publishing further content was restored after the intervention of Ordo Iuris. YouTube decision on wSensie.tv did not indicate whether it was not allowed to present the teachings of the Church on the platform altogether or whether the reason for blocking the programmes was because of their content or title.</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"> </p> <p style="margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">The Institute's lawyers sent a pretrial summons to Google, in which they sought an apology from the authors. Due to the lack of reaction from the management of Google, an action was brought for the protection of Paweł Lisicki's personal rights which were violated by "attributing to his work certain terms that suggest its negative character".</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"> </p> <p style="margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">"On behalf of journalist Lisicki, we demand that Google stop further infringements, namely that the owner of YouTube refrain from removing and blocking content involving the claimant. We also requested that the court oblige Google to apologise to journalist Lisicki in writing and to publish the text of the apology on one quarter of the YouTube.com homepage. - commented Tomasz Chudzinski, an advocate, from Ordo Iuris.</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"> </p> <p style="margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">Blocking wSensie.tv and removing journalist Lisicki's materials have not been the only manifestations of censorship recently. In recent months, YouTube has suspended the TV channel wRealu24.pl, blocked the material with the homily of Archbishop Marek Jędraszewski, and limited the Facebook coverage of many Christian and conservative profiles. Ordo Iuris lawyers are analysing the submitted applications and wherever possible, they take legal action in matters related to ideological censorship.</span></span></span></span></p> <p style="margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"> </p> <p style="margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">Advocates Tomasz Chudzinski and Jerzy Kwaśniewski are working on the case on behalf of Ordo Iuris.</span></span></span></span></p> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--body--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: x field--node--field-kategoria--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--node--field-kategoria.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--field-kategoria.html.twig * field--entity-reference.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--field-kategoria--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> Kategoria } <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--field-kategoria--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: x field--node--field-zdjecie--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--node--field-zdjecie.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--field-zdjecie.html.twig * field--image.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--field-zdjecie--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'image_formatter' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * image-formatter--node--aktualnosc--field-zdjecie.html.twig x image-formatter.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image-formatter.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'image_style' --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image-style.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'image' --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image.html.twig' --> <img src="/sites/default/files/styles/artykul_full/public/2019-11/AdobeStock_28970701.jpeg?itok=7yn11RUh" width="250" height="125" alt="" typeof="foaf:Image" /> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image.html.twig' --> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image-style.html.twig' --> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image-formatter.html.twig' --> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--field-zdjecie--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * field--node--field-zrodlo-zdjecia--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--node--field-zrodlo-zdjecia.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--field-zrodlo-zdjecia.html.twig * field--string.html.twig x field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field.html.twig' --> <div>Adobe Stock</div> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * field--node--field-tagi--aktualnosc.html.twig x field--node--field-tagi.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--field-tagi.html.twig * field--entity-reference.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/page_node/field--node--field-tagi.html.twig' --> <hr> <ul class="tags_list"> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/google" hreflang="pl">Google</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/censorship" hreflang="pl">censorship</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/lawsuit" hreflang="pl">lawsuit</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/freedom-speech" hreflang="pl">freedom of speech</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/internet" hreflang="pl">internet</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/ordo-iuris" hreflang="pl">Ordo Iuris</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/pawel-lisicki" hreflang="pl">Paweł Lisicki</a></li> </ul> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/page_node/field--node--field-tagi.html.twig' --> Tue, 19 Nov 2019 15:43:25 +0000 filip.bator 998 at https://en.ordoiuris.pl OSCE Conference: Ordo Iuris and journalists give a voice on censorship on the Internet https://en.ordoiuris.pl/freedom-conscience/osce-conference-ordo-iuris-and-journalists-give-voice-censorship-internet <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: x field--node--title--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--node--title.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--title.html.twig * field--string.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--title--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> OSCE Conference: Ordo Iuris and journalists give a voice on censorship on the Internet <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--title--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * field--node--uid--aktualnosc.html.twig x field--node--uid.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--uid.html.twig * field--entity-reference.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field--node--uid.html.twig' --> <span> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'username' --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/user/username.html.twig' --> <span lang="" about="/user/116" typeof="schema:Person" property="schema:name" datatype="">filip.bator</span> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/user/username.html.twig' --> </span> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field--node--uid.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * field--node--created--aktualnosc.html.twig x field--node--created.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--created.html.twig * field--created.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field--node--created.html.twig' --> <span>pt., 09/27/2019 - 15:57</span> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field--node--created.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'links__node' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * links--node.html.twig x links.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/navigation/links.html.twig' --> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/navigation/links.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: x field--node--body--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--node--body.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--body.html.twig * field--text-with-summary.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--body--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> <p class="text-align-justify" style="text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><strong><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">Many Internet users face the problem of censorship in social media. This was the focus of the debate organised by the Ordo Iuris Institute as part of the Warsaw conference of the Organisation of Security and Cooperation in Europe. Lawyers and journalists from Poland and abroad took part in the event.</span></span></strong></span></span></p> <p class="text-align-justify" style="text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">During the meeting, insights into censorship on the Internet were provided by Jolanta Hajdasz, PhD (Association of Polish Journalists), Paweł Lisicki ("Do Rzeczy”, wSensie.tv), Cezary Krysztopa ("Tygodnik Solidarność"), Krzysztof Łuksza (wRealu24.pl), Łukasz Karpiel (PCh24.pl), and Varro Vooglaid, an Estonian lawyer and columnist. It was noted that modern censorship in social media is ever more frequently assuming an economic dimension. Apart from merely blocking or removing content, the administrators of social platforms go as far as to restrict monetisation, i.e. they prevent the possibility of earning money on content that arguably "does not meet the standards".</span></span></span></span></p> <p class="text-align-justify" style="text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">The speakers also emphasised that almost solely conservative content is censored. While censoring content, platform administrators often use the imprecise term of "hate speech." In many cases, Internet users do not receive any feedback about the reasons for removing the materials they posted.</span></span></span></span></p> <p class="text-align-justify" style="text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">The debate was opened by attorney Jerzy Kwaśniewski.</span></span></span></span></p> <p class="text-align-justify" style="text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">"Freedom of speech and freedom of assembly are one of the fundamental freedoms of democratic societies. They guarantee a proper process legitimising the system, legitimising public authority and its exercise," underlined the President of Ordo Iuris.</span></span></span></span></p> <p class="text-align-justify" style="text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">The mechanism of censorship employed by the owners of Facebook and YouTube was described by Tymoteusz Zych, PhD, Vice-President of the Ordo Iuris Institute. He also made a case for introducing appropriate changes into legal regulations in order to guarantee the freedom of speech in social media.</span></span></span></span></p> <p class="text-align-justify" style="text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">"Access to information is determined by social media. This sphere undoubtedly needs legal regulations," noted Zych.</span></span></span></span></p> <p class="text-align-justify" style="text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">Attorney Tomasz Piotr Chudzinski, in turn, discussed current legal tools that may be used in response to the unlawful removal of content posted in social media.</span></span></span></span></p> <p class="text-align-justify" style="text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">"In Poland, the right to freely express one's views is considered a personal right. If social media use censorship, the personal right of the user who posted specific content is violated," he stated. </span></span></span></span></p> <p class="text-align-justify" style="text-align:justify; margin-right:0cm; margin-left:0cm"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:11.0pt" xml:lang="EN-GB"><span style="font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">The debate was part of the Human Dimension Implementation Meeting - an annual conference on human rights and democracy, the largest in its kind in Europe. The representatives of Ordo Iuris participate in the conference every year</span></span></span></span></p> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--body--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: x field--node--field-kategoria--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--node--field-kategoria.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--field-kategoria.html.twig * field--entity-reference.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--field-kategoria--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> Kategoria } <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--field-kategoria--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: x field--node--field-zdjecie--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--node--field-zdjecie.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--field-zdjecie.html.twig * field--image.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--field-zdjecie--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'image_formatter' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * image-formatter--node--aktualnosc--field-zdjecie.html.twig x image-formatter.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image-formatter.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'image_style' --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image-style.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'image' --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image.html.twig' --> <img src="/sites/default/files/styles/artykul_full/public/2019-09/IMG_0989.JPG?itok=P1AVyf68" width="250" height="125" alt="" typeof="foaf:Image" /> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image.html.twig' --> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image-style.html.twig' --> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/image-formatter.html.twig' --> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/news_block/field--node--field-zdjecie--aktualnosc.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * field--node--field-zrodlo-zdjecia--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--node--field-zrodlo-zdjecia.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--field-zrodlo-zdjecia.html.twig * field--string.html.twig x field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field.html.twig' --> <div>Ordo Iuris</div> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'core/themes/stable/templates/field/field.html.twig' --> <!-- THEME DEBUG --> <!-- THEME HOOK: 'field' --> <!-- FILE NAME SUGGESTIONS: * field--node--field-tagi--aktualnosc.html.twig x field--node--field-tagi.html.twig * field--node--aktualnosc.html.twig * field--field-tagi.html.twig * field--entity-reference.html.twig * field.html.twig --> <!-- BEGIN OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/page_node/field--node--field-tagi.html.twig' --> <hr> <ul class="tags_list"> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/osce" hreflang="pl">osce</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/censorship" hreflang="pl">censorship</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/freedom-speech" hreflang="pl">freedom of speech</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/internet" hreflang="pl">internet</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/facebook" hreflang="pl">facebook</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/google" hreflang="pl">Google</a></li> <li class="label label-ordo2"><a href="/ordo-iuris" hreflang="pl">Ordo Iuris</a></li> </ul> <!-- END OUTPUT from 'themes/custom/ordoiuris/templates/page_node/field--node--field-tagi.html.twig' --> Fri, 27 Sep 2019 13:57:24 +0000 filip.bator 976 at https://en.ordoiuris.pl