{"id":17788,"date":"2026-08-24T17:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-08-24T15:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/holistic.news\/en\/?p=17788"},"modified":"2026-08-24T14:03:30","modified_gmt":"2026-08-24T12:03:30","slug":"defamation-lawsuits-the-price-of-truth","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/holistic.news\/en\/defamation-lawsuits-the-price-of-truth\/","title":{"rendered":"When Reputation, Power, and Public Criticism Collide"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Where Does Freedom of Speech End?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The protection of intangible values such as reputation and dignity seems obvious and appears to meet not only universal ethical criteria<\/strong>, but even the standards of what we might call \u201cpopular justice\u201d: the common sense of what is right and what is wrong. Yet when we look more closely, the problem turns out to be far from simple, and not at all easy to judge. Different countries protect honour and reputation to different degrees. They also adopt different rules for defending them, and their courts vary in how severely they treat people accused of violating the law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thousands of judicial panels have already dealt with questions related to the protection of personal interests. The Supreme Court has ruled and issued opinions on them, and even the European Court of Human Rights has spoken on the matter. It has wisely stated that public figures, including politicians, must accept a somewhat lower level of protection than other citizens<\/strong>, because citizens have a right to criticise those in power, and muzzling that criticism would threaten freedom of speech.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The European Court of Human Rights has therefore said that politicians should have thick skin<\/a><\/strong> and that this is the price they must pay for belonging to a class that, in other respects, enjoys privilege.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Defamation Lawsuits Can Begin With the Truth<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Ruling on the protection of personal interests often creates real difficulty. On the one hand, the legislature gives us freedom of speech and constitutionally guarantees the right to criticism, satire, irony, and caricature. On the other hand, it also protects everyone\u2019s dignity and reputation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Courts therefore often struggle to decide when someone has crossed the limits of free speech. And unfortunately, we sometimes see absurd situations in which courts punish people for telling the truth. Say, for example, that you publicly call someone a thief after a court has convicted that person of theft. A court may decide that you told the truth, but still violated your opponent\u2019s dignity and must therefore face punishment. Foolish and unethical?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yes. But in Poland, many judgments have occurred in which the court did not ask what the TRUTH was<\/strong>, but what the person about whom that truth had been spoken felt. The reverse has also happened: there have been trials in which people lied about certain individuals, yet the court found that the accused, though lying, acted in the public interest and therefore released them from punishment. Foolish and unethical? Absolutely. But many Polish judges do not judge on the basis of law and morality. They follow ideological sympathies and the loyalties of their own professional circles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Martyniuk Versus Kawalec\u2019s Parody<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Some people take offence at everything<\/a><\/strong>: a joke, irony, satire, caricature. I have even known artists who took criticism of their work so personally that they threatened unfavourable reviewers with lawsuits. Today, similar threats come not only from artists, but also from the owners of hotels or restaurants that receive negative reviews.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In old Poland, in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the noble republic of the early modern era, litigious quarrellers formed a familiar social type. Aleksander Fredro mocked such attitudes brilliantly in Zemsta<\/em> (The Revenge<\/em>), his classic Polish comedy, by giving us the character of Rejent Milczek, a scheming notary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In recent days, we have seen similar litigiousness on the contemporary Polish entertainment scene. Zenon Martyniuk, a disco polo singer from Poland\u2019s hugely popular pop-folk dance genre, grew so furious over actor and singer Jacek Kawalec\u2019s cabaret parody of his work that he threatened him with a lawsuit. Well, clearly the parody hurt. But that is the price of fame, money, and celebrity. Martyniuk must understand that no exceptional immunity protects him, as if he were the British monarch.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n