The right to the protection of life and health is one of the fundamental human rights. Therefore, it cannot be restricted on the basis of gender, especially when we are dealing with a pregnant woman. Meanwhile, in Poland, since the 1990s, there has been a process of limiting access to legal abortion. Democratically elected authorities have the right to shape the legal system in this area as well, however, by virtue of a ruling of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal in 2020, abortion has been outlawed in cases where pregnancy threatens a woman’s life or health. The number of cases where doctors refuse to help pregnant women is increasing, and there is even a loss of a woman’s life as a result of doctors’ passivity. In these circumstances, it is necessary to analyse the regulations in force in Poland and determine what is currently the scope of a woman’s rights, what is the scope of a doctor’s duties, and whether the regulations do not excessively hinder access to legal abortion.

Wyrok Trybunału Konstytucyjnego z dnia 22 października 2020 roku dotyczący aborcji eugenicznej spowodował lawinę nienawiści kobiet wobec rządu PiS. Dialog publiczny między kobietami, a obozem władzy stał się monologiem. Rozpoczął się strajk kobiet, pomimo zagrożenia sanitarnego. Strajk kobiet należy do grupy nowych ruchów społecznych, które organizują się spontanicznie za pośrednictwem nowych mediów w przestrzeni wirtualnej. Strajkujące kobiety zaczęły używać języka agresywnego, wulgarnego by podkreślić swoją złość. Język z ulicznych strajków stał się obecny na stronach Facebooka o charakterze feministycznym, lewicowym i proaborcyjnym. Analiza została przeprowadzona na podstawie statystyk treści znajdujących się w części polskojęzycznej mediów społecznościowych, z wyszczególnieniem Facebooka w czasie od 22.10.2020 do 1.01.2021 r.

Laws Matter – Alon Harel Concept of Constitutional Obligation to Criminalize

The article will present the concepts of the Israeli philosopher Alon Harel relating to the issue of non-instrumental justification of law, including criminal law. An important aspect of Harel’s considerations is the obligation to criminalize acts that violate fundamental rights and freedoms. This duty should be expressed in the constitution, symmetrically to the content of constitutional rights and freedoms. The background to the considerations is the judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal of 22 October 2020 issued in case K 1/20. The article will outline the line of argumentation (following Alon Harel) in favor of the recognition that regardless of socio-ethical or philosophical issues, the Tribunal’s decision was necessary for the good not only of individual individuals, but also of the legal system.

Victimless crimes in the light of the Polish Constitution and the jurisprudence of Constitutional Court

The term “victimless crimes” is one of the leading concepts of American criminology, also used by libertarian circles. It assumes that acts that do not cause harm to the other person (or are made with his consent) should be legal. This theory has also found a resonance in American constitutionalism, whereas in Polish science of constitutional law this concept is virtually unknown. The case law of the Constitutional Tribunal is also more conservative and paternalistic than libertarian. The Tribunal did not consider unconstitutional provisions to drive a car with fastened seatbelts. Possession of marijuana for own use also, in the Court’s opinion, may also be prohibited by Polish law and the justification used typical conservative arguments. The Polish Constitution also protects public morality, which is in direct contradiction to libertarianism. The author of the concept, Edwin Schur, also considered abortion as “victimless crime”. The Constitutional Tribunal has an extremely different position, recognizing the need to protect unborn life. The axiology of the Polish Constitution is closer to the same spirit of Christian democracy than to extreme liberalism.

The Illiberal Constitutional Court in Poland on the Example of the Judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal on Abortion, file ref. no. K 1/20

The paper discusses the characteristics of the Constitutional Tribunal as an illiberal constitutional court. After the political remodelling initiated in 2015 and the capture of the Tribunal, this body gained a new role in developing, protecting and stabilizing illiberal constitutionalism. The Tribunal, as an illiberal constitutional court, often adjudicates in panels inconsistent with constitutional rules, is abusively activated by the ruling option and issues judgments that are beneficial to the rulers and justify their constitutionally questionable actions. How an illiberal constitutional court operates is presented in the example of an abortion judgment, file ref. no. K 1/20. This case also shows the illiberal ground of the new system.

Establishing the Right to Abortion in the Constitutional Principles of Privacy, Equality and Freedom in the US and the Arguments of the Constitutional Tribunal of October 22, 2020

The U.S. Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade ruling was pivotal in American women’s fight for the right to abortion. It was based on the constitutional principle of the right to privacy and was criticized that it would be more appropriate to base it on the principle of equality. The aim of the article is to compare the way in which the U.S. Supreme Court rulings legalizing abortion have been argued with the Polish Constitutional Tribunal’s 2020 ruling limiting the already restrictive right to abortion. The article analyzes the judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal and presents its potential effects in terms of women’s rights, gender equality and freedom. In its conclusion, the article points to possible legal solutions to the abortion dilemma and addresses the issue of gender discrimination.

A Portrait of Wanda Półtawska Against the Background of Social and Moral Complexities of the 20th Century

Wanda Półtawska belonged to the departing generation of „Columbus”. Born in Lublin, where she was deprived of any of youth well-being, she always preferred to use the term “providence” to describe her adolescence. During the World War II she became the victim of medical experiments in concentration camp Ravensbrück. After the war she lived in Cracow. In her search for spiritual consolation from post-camp trauma she encounters a charismatic priest – Karol Wojtyła. This meeting developed into a genuine friendship, crowned with spiritual adoption. Półtawska turned out to be not only a devoted trustee of the bishop Wojtyła, but also his intellectual superstructure. She was and still is a voice of conscience, advocate of marital chastity und relentless defender of conceived life. Throughout her post-war life she was engaged in numerous initiatives created and developed by bishop Wojtyła, such as marriage counselling or Institute for Theology of the Family. After election of cardinal Wojtyła to the Pope she had been called to Rome, where she soon became an expert on the encyclical “Humanae Vitae”. She worked as a lecturer at the Institute for Studies of Marriage and Family, a subsidiary of Pontifical Lateran University. She also became a member of an elite academy Pro-Vita, where a famous event of miraculous healing from a cancer through the intercession of Saint Pio of Pietrelcina took place. She was present at John Paul II’s death bed. She is also known as author of many scientific and popular-scientific papers dealing with pastoral medicine. She was decorated with numerous medals and awards and is still ready to serve despite her age and devastating illness.

The Ban on Termination of Pregnancy for Embryopathological Reasons as a Reason for the Extremization of the Existing Axionormative Order

The main aim of the article is the attempt to decide whether the regulations on perinatal palliative care created by the parliamentary majority can justify the absolute ban on embryopathological abortion introduced by the Constitutional Tribunal? Of course, giving a clear answer to such questions is extremely difficult and will always be very subjective. This is why the author does not try to impose his own position on the admissibility/ inadmissibility of abortion for embryopathological reasons but tries to demonstrate that the adopted normative regulations regarding perinatal palliative care, to the extent that they constitute the only permissible option for parents, who receive the most terrible health diagnosis one’s unborn child should be seen in terms of legitimizing extremism.

Gloss on the Judgment of the Supreme Court of August 24, 2023, file ref. no. IV KK 37/22

The purpose of the gloss is to present the correct line of reasoning that the Supreme Court should have adopted to reach the conclusion approved by the glossator. Relevant jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights allows for the acceptance of the absence of a violation of the norm sanctioned as a result of the application of constitutional and convention interpretation, rather than just the lack of social harmfulness of the act, as basis for the denial of the element of criminality. Any legal restrictions on freedom of speech must arise from serious reasons and an urgent societal need.