Refine
Document Type
- Article (3) (remove)
Language
- Other Language (2)
- Spanish (1)
Has Fulltext
- no (3) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3) (remove)
Wolność wypowiedzi w Internecie: O roli mediów społecznościowych i pozytywnych obowiązkach państwa
(2022)
Modern online communication processes are characterized by the growing role of private entities (social media) and the emergence of numerous conflicts of a horizontal nature. This paper examines these issues from the standpoint of the ECtHR’s theory of positive obliga-tions. Consequently, it analyses the impact of new technologies on the freedom of expres-sion, the paradigm shift in communication, and the State’s positive obligations to prevent horizontal abuses. The article also analyses the existing and planned legal framework (national and EU). The main argument of this article is that public control over social media should be strengthened. Limiting their discretion to ensure adequate protection of rights and freedoms does not mean, however, the freedom of forum, understood as an unlimited right of access to the platform in order to express opinions.
In the case, Brzeziński v. Poland, the European Court of Human Rights for the third time addressed the issue of the summary electoral proceedings in the Polish legal system. The last judgement is an excellent opportunity to examine if the provisions of the electoral law concerning these proceedings are well designed and correctly interpreted by the Polish courts. There is no doubt that free elections and freedom of expression together form the bedrock of any democratic system. The two rights are inter-related and operate to reinforce each other. For this reason, it is particularly important in the period preceding an election that opinions and information of all kinds are permitted to circulate freely. On the other hand, national authorities are legitimised to create special proceedings in order to ensure the proper conduct of the electoral campaign by preventing the dissemination of false information. As a consequence, it is possible to verify factual statements contained in the materials pertaining to an electoral campaign. Special proceedings should not apply to the value judgements. If such comments and opinions infringe the candidate’s personal rights, he or she may seek redress under the general rules of protection of individual rights.
On 7 October 2020, the Constitutional Tribunal of Poland declared the unconstitutionality of essential provisions of the Treaty on European Union, calling into question the principle of the primacy of EU law (judgment K 3/21). This decision is closely related to the Polish judicial reform that has been severely criticised by the CJEU for violating standards of judicial inde-pendence. This study first explains the process of political capture of the Polish Constitu-tional Court and then looks at the content of the K 3/21 judgment: the Polish Constitutional Tribunal attempt to reject the aforementioned case law of the CJEU on the grounds that the EU institutions have exceeded their competences. Secondly, this study aims to determine the extent of the Union’s competences in the area of the national judiciary, to explain the me-thods of resolving potential conflicts between national and EU laws and to analyse the conse-quences of the primacy principle. The key argument of this part of the article is that national judges have the faculty to examine, ex officio, the compatibility of a given national provision with EU law. This power cannot be limited by any national act, nor by the fact that there is a prior declaration of its constitutionality.