Solidarity counts the most. Human rights after Adam Bodnar

Share

Ph.D, Assistant Professor in the Poznań Human Rights Center of the Institute of Law Studies of the Polish Academy of…

More

Poland of 2020 openly undermined the present concept of human rights protection on an unprecedented scale. The same year saw an awakening of social awareness and mass mobilization in defense of human rights. What will come next?



We know the illusoriness of lofty declarations of respect for human rights as a permanent state in confrontation with “realpolitik.” However, never before have we seen such an open undermining of the very foundations on which international systems of human rights protection are based.

 

Never before has this reality been so meekly accepted by the public. Perhaps one of the causes of this submissiveness hides in the evident takeover of the human rights discourse by populists and circles that understand human rights in a manner completely opposite to their true essence.

 

A telling example is the issue of freedom of speech and its guaranteed protection in the context of promoting content that is xenophobic, infringing on the LGBTQ+ people’s dignity, or offend people with particular social and political views. Under the guise of protecting the freedom of speech of a “discriminated minority with conservative views” or even protecting the “majority rights,” hate speech gains the status of an equal type of utterance in the public space.

 

In such a reversed narrative, it is no longer those who deny nonheteronormative people fundamental rights and freedoms that are treated as violators of human rights – they cast themselves as victims of such violations instead. Vulgar jokes about victims of the Holocaust broadcast on public television are now but a “commentary” to the current political events.

 

A perversion of justice

It seems that Poland of 2020 experienced a long time coming and rather successful change in the positioning, understanding, and observance of human rights in social and legal dimensions. On the one hand, we witnessed the radically dangerous tendency to undermine the very legitimacy of the legal protection of human rights and freedoms, namely the campaign to denigrate – on legal and purely psychological levels – the Istanbul Convention on preventing and combating violence against women. Recently, the Ordo Iuris Foundation submitted a bill to denounce the Istanbul Convention signed by 150 thousand people.

 

In 2020, we witnessed violations of basic human rights and freedoms committed with a perversion of justice, phasing out of the constitutional court that protects civil rights, depriving us of the right to a fair trial understood as an impartial and independent judiciary, and an unprecedented attack on the dignity and other fundamental rights of LGBTQ+ persons. All this was accompanied by the helplessness of international human rights monitoring bodies and the inaction of most of the Polish population.

 

On the other hand, the state of affairs simultaneously led to an unprecedented awakening of public awareness about the role of the guarantees of human rights protection and a mass mobilization in their defense.

 

However, the question remains open whether the process of relativizing and undermining the essence of human rights has not already penetrated Polish social tissue so deeply that even mass protests and movements formed around them will be unable to change the course of those threatening tendencies without reaching a critical mass.

 

Seeking means of defense

Human rights defenders face an exceptionally daunting task: to find effective methods to stop the negative phenomena, to relentlessly activate social forces to defend human rights, while continuing to fight for the implementation of particular rights and freedoms.

 

One of the methods may consist of pointing out all half-truths and attempts at hijacking the concept of human rights by its enemies, systematically reminding in public space what legal protection against hate speech is and what it is not. Another method is to not give up the fight for the implementation of a standard of protection of a particular right or freedom that exceeds the established minimum.

 

Another necessary matter is for us to introduce human rights education as early as possible.

 

However, all this requires reflection, coordination, and space to undertake action, ensure the cooperation of various actors, and mobilize also on the international level. Moreover, it requires financial support, which is a particularly troublesome measure given the systemic exclusion of human rights NGOs from the ability to obtain funds.

 

Lawyer’s responsibility

At no time or place can even the noblest and most courageous civic initiatives fully counterbalance actions of the state and its institutions that do not comply with standards of human rights protection. After all, it is the state that exercises power, concludes or denounces acts of international law, and implements (or not) their provisions. Finally, it is the state that mostly shapes social policy, education, international relations – all of which are vital for human rights in every country.

 

In such a situation, one of the key roles plays the social responsibility of lawyers who regardless of their specialization, should defend constitutional human rights and freedoms, and those deriving from treaties under international law. Lawyers should uphold civil society, support victims of human rights violations, and relentlessly remind us about the key role of guarantees enshrined in law. The Free Courts initiative can certainly be called a model for such an approach in Poland.

 

How to understand human rights

The imminent departure of Adam Bodnar (one of Wiktor Osiatyński’s disciples) from the office of the Commissioner for Human Rights will constitute a defining and critical moment for the protection of human rights in Poland. Alongside Bodnar will leave an understanding of human rights that we associate with him, which is symptomatic of current reality. It is a reality different from the one during overt oppression – yet somehow similar.

 

In The Power of the Powerless, Václav Havel writes about a society under dictatorship and oppression as composed of “interconnected vessels,” about the interdependence of attitudes, about the potential of civic courage of an individual, which will ultimately translate into fundamental systemic changes. Today, in addition to various methods of defending human rights, we actually require the same thing: civic courage. Supported by the steadfastness of courts and the active work of international institutions, civic courage may be capable of upholding the status of human rights established over the past decades, and consequently protect each and every one of us.

 

Solidarity counts the most

We do not know whether the idea of civic panels promoted by Adam Bodnar will come to fruition. But it remains the best solution in times when some negate elementary human rights and values. One of such panels should be devoted to a general reflection on human rights. Together, we may reflect on what human rights mean to us, how some try to take human rights away from us, and how to make human rights a foundation resistant to attacks of populists.

 

Human rights lawyers should carefully listen to the conclusions of such a debate and propose appropriate legal changes. In turn, this joint effort may well become the catalyst for rebuilding the value behind every system of human rights protection: human solidarity. In Poland, it is solidarity written both with lower- and uppercase “S.”

 

Dr. Aleksandra Gliszczyńska-Grabias is Assistant Professor in the Poznań Human Rights Center of the Institute of Law Studies of the Polish Academy of Sciences



Author


Ph.D, Assistant Professor in the Poznań Human Rights Center of the Institute of Law Studies of the Polish Academy of…


More

Published

March 22, 2021

Tags

Supreme CourtConstitutional TribunalDisciplinary ChamberPolandjudgesdisciplinary proceedingsrule of lawZbigniew ZiobroNational Council of the JudiciaryCourt of Justice of the EUjudicial independenceEuropean CommissionEuropean UnionAndrzej DudaMałgorzata ManowskaCourt of JusticeEuropean Court of Human RightsMinister of JusticeIgor Tuleyadisciplinary systemAdam Bodnarmuzzle lawJarosław KaczyńskiNational Recovery PlanCJEUMateusz MorawieckiCommissioner for Human Rightsneo-judgesCourt of Justice of the European UniondemocracyPrzemysław RadzikWaldemar ŻurekNational Council for Judiciarypresidential electionselectionselections 2023disciplinary commissionercriminal lawJulia PrzyłębskaPiotr SchabKamil Zaradkiewiczmedia freedomharassmentpreliminary rulingsHungarySupreme Administrative Courtelections 2020K 3/21Dagmara Pawełczyk-WoickajudiciaryFirst President of the Supreme CourtŁukasz PiebiakprosecutorsPresidentRecovery FundBeata MorawiecPaweł JuszczyszynProsecutor GeneralMichał Lasotafreedom of expressionMaciej NawackiEuropean Arrest WarrantSejmprosecutionCOVID-19Regional Court in KrakówCriminal ChamberNational ProsecutorConstitutionPrime MinisterMinistry of JusticecourtsMałgorzata GersdorfMarek SafjanEU budgetdisciplinary liability for judgesMaciej FerekOSCEWojciech HermelińskiExtraordinary Control and Public Affairs ChamberIustitiacriminal proceedingsWłodzimierz WróbelVenice Commissionconditionality mechanismAleksander StepkowskiTHEMISLabour and Social Security ChamberStanisław BiernatPiScommission on Russian influenceStanisław PiotrowiczPresident of the Republic of PolandNCJimmunityconditionalityAnna DalkowskaJustice FundcorruptionLaw and JusticeNational Public ProsecutorCouncil of Europefreedom of assemblyKrystian MarkiewiczreformsReczkowicz and Others v. PolandKrzysztof Parchimowiczacting first president of the Supreme Court2017policeSenateAndrzej Zollmedia independenceSLAPPdefamationStrategic Lawsuits Against Public ParticipationLGBTJustice Defence Committee – KOSEwa ŁętowskaDidier ReyndersFreedom HouseAmsterdam District CourtMay 10 2020 electionsXero Flor w Polsce Sp. z o.o. v. PolandOrdo IurisPresident of PolandAndrzej StępkaBroda and Bojara v PolandSylwia Gregorczyk-AbramPiotr GąciarekJarosław WyrembakPM Mateusz MorawieckiArticle 7Next Generation EUConstitutional Tribunal PresidentUrsula von der LeyenLex DudaTVPmediaLex Super OmniaProfessional Liability ChamberreformJarosław DudziczK 7/21National Reconstruction PlansuspensionparliamentChamber of Professional LiabilityEAWArticle 6 ECHRP 7/20Supreme Court PresidentLech GarlickiMichał WawrykiewiczabortionPiotr PrusinowskiNational Electoral Commissionelectoral codeJanusz NiemcewiczTeresa Dębowska-RomanowskaStanisław RymarMałgorzata Pyziak- SzafnickaKazimierz DziałochaBogdan ŚwięczkowskiNetherlandsAndrzej MączyńskiMarek MazurkiewiczvetoStefan JaworskiMirosław GranatOLAFBiruta Lewaszkiewicz-PetrykowskaViktor OrbanJózef IwulskiMaciej MiteraSLAPPsjudcial independenceWojciech ŁączkowskiAdam JamrózPATFoxFerdynand RymarzKonrad WytrykowskiRafał Puchalskismear campaignmilestonesKrakówMarzanna Piekarska-Drążekstate of emergencyUkraineelectoral processBelaruscourt presidentsAdam SynakiewiczXero Flor v. PolandAstradsson v Icelandright to fair trialEdyta BarańskaJoanna Hetnarowicz-SikoraCentral Anti-Corruption BureauJakub IwaniecsurveillancePegasusDariusz DrajewiczJoanna Misztal-KoneckaCivil ChamberK 6/21Wojciech MaczugaSzymon Szynkowski vel SękDariusz ZawistowskiOKO.presselections integrityelections fairnessMarek ZubikBohdan ZdziennickiMirosław WyrzykowskiSławomira Wronkowska-JaśkiewiczPiotr TulejaJerzy StępieńAndrzej RzeplińskitransparencyMariusz KamińskiMaciej Taborowskiinsulting religious feelingsPaweł Filipekpublic mediaMariusz MuszyńskiKrystyna PawłowiczlexTuskcourt changesMarek PietruszyńskiMichał LaskowskiSupreme Audit Officeabuse of state resourcesLaw on the NCJEuropean ParliamentJarosław GowincoronavirusRussiaZuzanna Rudzińska-BluszczFree Courts11 January March in WarsawCCBEPiebiak gatehuman rightsrecommendationC-791/19Human Rights CommissionerMarcin WarchołLGBT ideology free zonesreportEuropean Association of JudgesPiotr Pszczółkowskiretirement agedecommunizationGeneral Assembly of the Supreme Court Judgesintimidation of dissentersdemocratic backslidingpublic opinion pollZiobroEU law primacyMarian BanaśThe Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europecriminal codeBelgiumlex NGOEwa Wrzosekcivil societytransferAdam Tomczyńskimedia pluralismBohdan Bieniek#RecoveryFilesFrans TimmermansLIBE Committeerepairing the rule of lawUS Department of StateMarcin KrajewskiKarolina Miklaszewska2018NGOFull-Scale Election Observation MissionODIHRNations in TransitStanisław ZabłockiPetros TovmasyanJerzy KwaśniewskiPiotr MazurekGrzegorz PudaNational Recovery Plan Monitoring CommitteeWiesław KozielewiczChamber of Extraordinary Control and Public AffairsMałgorzata Dobiecka-WoźniakCouncil of the EURafał LisakMichał DworczykWojciech Sadurskidefamatory statementsRome StatuteInternational Criminal CourtC-619/18Rights and Values Programmejudgepress releaseAntykastalex WoślegislationCourt of Appeal in KrakówPutinismKaczyńskiPaulina AslanowiczJarosław MatrasMałgorzata Wąsek-Wiaderekct on the Protection of the PopulatioWorld Justice Project awardStanisław ZdunIrena BochniakKrystyna Morawa-FryźlewiczŁukasz BilińskiIvan MischenkoJoanna Kołodziej-MichałowiczMonika FrąckowiakArkadiusz CichockiEmilia SzmydtTomasz SzmydtE-mail scandalAndrzej SkowronKasta/AntykastaKatarzyna Chmuraadvocate generalGrzegorz FurmankiewiczMarek JaskulskiEwa ŁąpińskaZbigniew ŁupinaPaweł StyrnaSwieczkowskiDworczyk leaksMałgorzata FroncHater ScandalAleksandra RutkowskaGeneral Court of the EUArkadiusz RadwanLech WałęsaWałęsa v. Polandright to an independent and impartial tribunal established by lawpilot-judgmentDonald Tusk governmentRafał WojciechowskiDobrochna Bach-Goleckalex RaczkowskiPiotr Raczkowskithe Spy ActdisinformationCT Presidentfundamental rightsNational Broadcasting Councilelection fairnessequal treatmentcivil lawMarcin MatczakDariusz KornelukNational School of Judiciary and Public Prosecution (KSSiP)codification commissiondelegationsWatchdog PolskaDariusz BarskiLasotapopulismState TribunalRadosław BaszukAction PlanJustice MinistryVěra JourováDonald Tuskjustice system reformAnti-SLAPP Directiveinsultgag lawsuitsstrategic investmentinvestmentlustrationJakub KwiecińskidiscriminationAct on the Supreme Courtelectoral commissionsEuropean Court of HuKrzysztof RączkaPoznańTomasz Koszewskitest of independenceSebastian MazurekElżbieta Jabłońska-MalikJoanna Scheuring-WielgusoppositionThe National Centre for Research and DevelopmentAdam Gendźwiłłtransitional justiceDariusz DończykKoan LenaertsKarol WeitzZbigniew KapińskiAnna GłowackaCourt of Appeal in WarsawOsiatyński'a ArchiveEUUS State DepartmentAssessment Actenvironmentextraordinary commissionWhite PaperKaspryszyn v PolandNCR&DNCBiREuropean Anti-Fraud Office OLAFJustyna WydrzyńskaAgnieszka Brygidyr-DoroszJoanna KnobelCrimes of espionageJędrzej Dessoulavy-ŚliwińskiMarek Piertuszyńskihate speechhate crimesmedia taxadvertising taxmediabezwyboruJacek KurskiKESMAIndex.huGrzęda v PolandŻurek v PolandPrzemysław CzarnekJacek CzaputowiczMarcin RomanowskiElżbieta KarskaPrzemysła Radzikmedia lawRafał TrzaskowskiSobczyńska and Others v PolandTelex.huJelenForum shoppingFirst President of the Suprme CourtEuropean Economic and Social CommitteeSebastian KaletaOrganization of Security and Co-operation in EuropeC-156/21C-157/21foreign agents lawArticle 2Rome IIJózsef SzájerChamber of Extraordinary VerificationKlubrádióequalityGazeta WyborczaLGBT free zonesPollitykaBrussels Ilegislative practiceENAZbigniew BoniekAK judgmentautocratizationMultiannual Financial FrameworkOpenbaar MinisterieRegional Court in Amsterdamabortion rulingArticle 10 ECHRprotestsinterim measuresLeszek MazurIrena MajcherAmsterdamLMmutual trustthe Regional Court in Warsawpublic broadcasterUnited NationsForum Współpracy Sędziówthe NetherlandsDenmarkact on misdemeanoursCivil Service ActParliamentary Assembly of the Council of EuropeNorwegian Ministry of Foreign AffairsNorwegian fundsNorwayKraśnikOmbudsmanKarlsruheAusl 301 AR 104/19SwedenFinlandMariusz KrasońC-487/19GermanyCelmerC354/20 PPUC412/20 PPUIrelandMarek AstLSOright to protestSławomir JęksaWiktor JoachimkowskiRoman Giertychtrans-Atlantic valuesMichał WośMinistry of FinancelawyersMirosław Wróblewskirepressive actborderprimacyEU treatiesAgnieszka Niklas-BibikSłupsk Regional CourtMaciej RutkiewiczAct of 20 December 2019Amnesty InternationalJacek SasinEvgeni TanchevKochenovPechPaulina Kieszkowska-KnapikMaria Ejchart-DuboisAgreement for the Rule of LawPorozumienie dla PraworządnościAct sanitising the judiciaryFreedom in the WorldECJErnest BejdaThe First President of the Supreme CourtMaciej CzajkaMariusz JałoszewskiŁukasz RadkepolexitFrackowiakDolińska-Ficek and Ozimek v PolandRzeszówKoen LenaertsharrassmentOlimpia Barańska-Małuszeinfringment actionHudocPKWKonrad SzymańskiPiotr BogdanowiczPiotr BurasLeon KieresIpsosEU valuesNational Prosecutor’s OfficeBogdan ŚwiączkowskiDisicplinary ChamberTribunal of StateOlsztyn courtPrzemysła CzarnekEducation MinisterENCJauthoritarian equilibriumArticle 258postal voteTVNjournalistslexTVNEwa MaciejewskaGerard BirgfellerPolish mediaAlina CzubieniakSimpson judgmentpostal vote billclientelismoligarchic systemEuropean Public Prosecutor's Officeresolution of 23 January 2020Polish National FoundationLux VeritatisMałgorzata BednarekPiotr WawrzykIsrael