The article analyses the legitimacy of citizens telecommunications data retention usage in the fight against terrorism. Data retention, that is the preventive storage of information on the source, data, hour and duration of a connection, type of the connection, communication tool and location of a recipient, is a powerful source of knowledge about citizens and their use should be soundly justified. However, both the European Union and Polish practices show that behind this interference in privacy there is neither a guarantee that the data stored would be used exclusively to fight terrorism and severe crimes, nor a sufficient access control mechanism. The efficiency of data use in the fight against organized crimes, including terrorism, is also dubious.
  In her work the author analyses Polish studies concerning information disclosure issues, Internet publications of the European Union and American reports on retention programmes, as well as Polish and foreign positions of non-governmental organizations engaged in the civil rights protection in this respect.

Anti-terrorism policy as a dilemma of liberal democracy

Terrorism is harmful to democratic governments and societies. In addition to the visible and the direct effects of attacks on bystanders, aim bombers are undermining democratic values, including the weakening of confidence in state institutions and laws that regulate their functioning. As a result of the use of violence can permanently give birth to create a socio-political divisions, antagonize certain entities and groups, and thus provoke conflicts thus destroying the existing compromises, agreements or arrangements between the parties concerned. In matters of international terrorism it is not only a challenge for the rule of law, but because it also applies to relations between states, poses a serious threat to security and stability.

The article attempts to confront the individual’s constitutional right to informational autonomy and the powers of the Police in the framework of which the service may collect and process personal data. Bearing in mind the paramount role of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland and its special importance for the sphere of rights and freedoms, the key regulations devoted to the right to privacy and the possibility of limiting informational autonomy were referred to. Treating the constitutional content as fundamental in the relationship between the individual and the state authorities, they were referred to the powers of the Police based on which the service may legally interfere in the information sphere of the individual. It was also stressed that the multiplicity of powers and the expansion of their catalog make it necessary to pay more attention to applying the proportionality mechanism.

The article examines the mechanisms of defamation in the internet space, social media and Facebook in particular. Human dignity is protected both as a constitutional value and as an individual right, though in everyday practice law-enforcement bodies usually tend to be unwilling to react to violations of human dignity, while appropriate legal provisions are often not in place to be implemented. Actions taken by the police in investigating appropriate cases do not always manage to identify perpetrators or bring them to justice. Most internet or cyber crime occurs across international borders and can be committed anonymously. There are certain types of defamatory statements that are considered to harm the reputation of the victim. Libel in the internet involves cyberbullying, online harassment, cyber-stalking, and, most of all, internet trolls. Trolling is any deliberate and intentional attempt to disrupt the credibility of others, often involving petty arguments. People tend to lose control of their emotions when they go online. An explosion of raw and unbridled emotions follows, standards wane, and eventually some internet users lose their touch with reality. Cyber violence and online harassment are punishable crimes and are subject to criminal prosecution: defamation, libel and online threats. Stalking and vulgar language in public places are offences subject to public prosecution and the provisions of the Petty Offences Procedure Code. . Generally, a defamatory statement published to third parties has to be proved and it has to be proved that the publisher knew or should have known that the statement that they made which harmed the reputation was false. The good name or reputation of another can be damaged, or even totally destroyed, in a number of ways. To calumniate another is certainly to ruin a person’s or a company their good name and so to do them an injustice. The number of criminal offences under Article 212 has increased four times over the past ten years.

The Act on the State Commission for Investigation of Russian Influences vs. Personal Data Protection

The purpose of the article is to analyze the provisions of the Law on the State Commission for Investigating Russian Influences on the Internal Security of the Republic of Poland for 2007–2022 and its impact on the application of the provisions shaping the system of personal data protection. The text points out the numerous shortcomings of the provisions of this law, its inconsistency with the provisions of the Constitution and its inconsistency with the provisions of RODO – the General Data Protection Regulation, the provisions of the Law on Personal Data Protection and the Law on the Protection of Personal Data Processed in Connection with Preventing and Combating Crime. The analysis shows that the Commission’s action may significantly harm human freedoms and rights, including privacy and the right to the protection of personal data, and the manner of its action is contrary to the principles of a democratic state of law.