Amendment to the Act on the Institute of National Remembrance

The Amendment to the Act on the Institute of National Remembrance of 2018 is a partly repealed Polish law that criminalized public speech attributing responsibility for the Holocaust to Poland or the Polish nation; the criminal provisions were removed again later that year, after international protests.[1][2] Article 2a, addressing crimes against "Polish citizens" by "Ukrainian nationalists", also caused controversy.[3] The legislation is part of the historical policy of the Law and Justice party which seeks to present a narrative of ethnic Poles exclusively as victims and heroes.[3][4][5] The law was widely seen as an infringement on freedom of expression and on academic freedom, and as a barrier to open discussion on Polish collaborationism,[3][6][7] leading to what has been described as "the biggest diplomatic crisis in [Poland's] recent history".[8]

While the act does not mention the "Polish death camp" controversy (involving concentration camps that had been built by Nazi Germany during World War II on German-occupied Polish soil), the act's chief intent was to address that controversy.[3] In 2019, the Constitutional Tribunal of Poland ruled that Article 2a was void and non-binding.[9]

History

A 2006 amendment with some of the same aims, Article 132a of the Polish Penal Code, was passed in 2006 with the efforts of Minister of Justice Zbigniew Ziobro but was invalidated two years later on procedural grounds.[10] The amendment was seen as targeting the writings of historian Jan T. Gross, whose work on the Jedwabne Pogrom triggered wide public debate in Poland; the amendment was frequently dubbed Lex Gross (Latin: Gross's Law).[11][12]

After a period of lobbying, the first version of the 2018 Amendment was drafted on 17 February 2016 by Minister of Justice Zbigniew Ziobro. On 30 August 2016, the Council of Ministers, presided over by Prime Minister Beata Szydło, forwarded the draft to the Sejm. [13] In September 2016, Zbigniew Ziobro asserted that the "Polish death camp" term constituted an attack on the "good name of the Polish nation".[3] The proposed legislation was criticized internationally as an attempt to suppress discussion of crimes that had been committed during the Holocaust by Polish citizens.[14][15] The addition of the "ban on propaganda of Banderism" to the law (Article 2a) was spearheaded by the right-wing political movement, Kukiz'15.[16] Kukiz'15 submitted this addition on July 16, 2016, however it was blocked by Civic Platform and Law and Justice parties citing "the good of Polish–Ukrainian relations".[17] Eventually, Article 2a was added to the bill on 25 January 2018 during the second reading.[18]

On 26 January 2018, after the bill's third reading, the Polish Parliament's lower chamber, the Sejm, approved the bill,[19]: Art. 1  which would apply to Poles as well as to foreigners. On 1 February 2018 the upper chamber, the Senate, passed the bill without amendment. On 6 February 2018 President Andrzej Duda signed the bill into law.[20] According to an opinion poll conducted in February 2018, 51% of Poles opposed the 2018 amendment.[21] Some parts of the law came into effect 14 days after its registration in Dziennik Ustaw (the Register of Statutes), with the full law coming into effect within 3 months. The law was referred to the Constitutional Tribunal of Poland for review of its compliance with the Polish Constitution.[22]

The bill led to an outcry of condemnations against the Polish government in the United States, Europe, and Israel.[7] Some critics went so far as to accuse the Polish government of Holocaust denial.[23][24][25] The Simon Wiesenthal Center issued a travel advisory urging Jews to limit visits to Poland due to "Poland's government campaign to change the historical truth by denying Polish complicity in the Nazi atrocities".[7]

As of May 2018, 70 different charges under the act were filed in Polish courts. Most, however, were by Polish citizens protesting the law by filing a self-incrimination. A non-protest charge was filed against the BBC for a production on the Auschwitz concentration camp that used the term "Polish Jewish ghettos".[3]

Original bill

The proposed law modifies a previous law relating to the Institute of National Remembrance (namely, the Act of 18 December 1998 on the Institute of National Remembrance – Commission for the Prosecution of Crimes against the Polish Nation[26] (Dz.U. 1998 nr 155 poz. 1016)).

Articles added in February 2018 included the following:

Protecting the reputation of the Republic of Poland and the Polish Nation shall be governed by the provisions of the Civil Code Act of 23 April 1964 (Polish Journal of Laws of 2016, items 380, 585 and 1579) on the protection of personal rights. A court action aimed at protecting the Republic of Poland’s or the Polish Nation’s reputation may be brought by a non-governmental organisation within the remit of its statutory activities. Any resulting compensation or damages shall be awarded to the State Treasury.

A court action aimed at protecting the Republic of Poland’s or the Polish Nation’s reputation may also be brought by the Institute of National Remembrance. In such cases, the Institute of National Remembrance shall have the capacity to be a party to court proceedings.

1. Whoever claims, publicly and contrary to the facts, that the Polish Nation or the Republic of Poland is responsible or co-responsible for Nazi crimes committed by the Third Reich, as specified in Article 6 of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal enclosed to the International agreement for the prosecution and punishment of the major war criminals of the European Axis, signed in London on 8 August 1945 (Polish Journal of Laws of 1947, item 367), or for other felonies that constitute crimes against peace, crimes against humanity or war crimes, or whoever otherwise grossly diminishes the responsibility of the true perpetrators of said crimes—shall be liable to a fine or imprisonment for up to 3 years. The sentence shall be made public.

2. If the act specified in clause 1 is committed unintentionally, the perpetrator shall be liable to a fine or a restriction of liberty.

3. No offence is committed if the criminal act specified in clauses 1 and 2 is committed in the course of the one's artistic or academic activity.'

The crimes of Ukrainian nationalists and members of Ukrainian organizations collaborating with the Third German Reich, as defined in the Act, are acts committed by Ukrainian nationalists in the years 1925–1950, involving the use of violence, terror or other forms of violation of human rights, against individuals or ethnic groups. One of the crimes of Ukrainian nationalists and members of Ukrainian organizations collaborating with the Third German Reich is their involvement in the extermination of the Jewish population and genocide on citizens of the Second Polish Republic in Volhynia and Eastern Lesser Poland."

Subsequent amendment

Pressure from the United States Department of State and the threat of downgrading the US-Poland relationship was significant in causing the Polish government to change course.[29] In late June 2018, the Polish government decided to stop waiting for a ruling from the constitutional court and in a hasty process, the legislation passed in record speed, only eight and a half hours, modified the act. The revision removed Articles 55a and 55b and thus the possibility of criminal prosecution, but thereby also removed the exemption for scholarship and the arts. Charges may still be levied in a civil court.[3][30][31]

Following the amendment, the Polish and Israeli prime ministers issued a joint declaration condemning antisemitism and rejecting "anti-Polonism".[2][3] This statement was condemned by Yad Vashem and its former director, Holocaust survivor Yitzhak Arad, because it was seen as equating the two.[3]

The Polish government's rationale for the law was that it was similar to laws against Holocaust denial in many Western European countries. Law scholars, however, have rejected this comparison, noting that the Polish law, unlike Holocaust denial laws, is intended to protect national honor. They state that the law is more closely related to Turkey's Article 301, which has been used to prosecute Turkish citizens who acknowledge the Armenian Genocide.[32][33][34]

Polish law scholars Aleksandra Gliszczyńska-Grabias, Grażyna Baranowska, and Anna Wójcik state that with the revised version of the law, "the risk of violations of individual rights and freedoms remains high".[35]

Polish legal scholar Patrycja Grzebyk writes that "A scientist who would like to investigate crimes committed by Polish citizens or the scale of Polish collaboration risks the loss of his time, money and reputation in lengthy proceedings against her/him commenced by someone who feels insulted." Even the revised version of the law is inconsistent with international law and human rights standards, as it "limit[s] freedom of speech and scientific activity in a disproportional way and entitle[s] NGOs to bring a lawsuit on behalf of the Polish state or nation".[36] Uladzislau Belavusau writes that, despite repeal of criminal sanctions, "the fears that the 2018 Law may negatively impact on freedom of expression about Polish history have solid foundations... Potentially anybody who expresses views that are counter to the official version of history recognised by the Polish State could fall under its scope."[33]

American jurist Alexander Tsesis states that the law, even its revised form, "restricts the acquisition, expression, and dissemination of knowledge" and "its ambiguity makes it uncertain who will be punished and for what communications", leading to a chilling effect on "satire, political commentary, historical analysis, and eyewitness testimony". He concludes that "Poland's effort to control the public spread of information is likely to lead to misleading conclusions that downplay victims' sufferings and incite hate propaganda."[37]

Polish law scholar Tomasz Tadeusz Koncewicz states that "The new law politicizes historical discussion and instrumentalizes law to achieve the desired reading of history and the past." The law "is the most recent proof that in Poland the past continues to be seen as a collection of indisputable truths, not open to divergent interpretations and historical debate".[38][39] Constitutional law scholar Wojciech Sadurski states that "[t]he chilling effect of such penal and civil sanctions upon scholarly or journalistic debates regarding the darker sides of Polish history is obvious" and that the law "concerns not so much statements of fact, but rather an opinion: an opinion about (the alleged) responsibility of, say, passive onlookers. To punish for an opinion is an anathema to any system of freedom of expression."[40]

Compatibility with international law

According to Polish scholar of constitutional law Piotr Mikuli, the amendment appears to contradict provisions of the Polish constitution including: "Art. 2 from which the so-called principle of decent legislation may be derived, Art. 42 para. 1 expressing the rule nullum crimen sine lege and Art. 54 para. 1 on the freedom to express opinions."[41] He also expressed the opinion that it did not meet the requirement of being necessary in a democratic society in order to allow a restriction in freedom of speech per Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.[41] Other law scholars have also questioned the compatibility of the law with international human rights standards, especially the European Convention on Human Rights.[35][32][36]

Reactions to Article 55a

Poland

On 29 January 2018 Polish President Andrzej Duda responded to official Israeli objections to the Polish bill, saying that Poland had been a victim of Nazi Germany and had not taken part in the Holocaust.[42] "I can never accept the slandering and libeling of us Poles as a nation or of Poland as a country through the distortion of historical truth and through false accusations." On 31 January 2018, before the Polish Senate vote on the bill, Deputy Prime Minister Beata Szydło said: "We Poles were victims, as were the Jews ... It is a duty of every Pole to defend the good name of Poland."[43]

A letter signed by many prominent persons in early February, including journalist Anne Applebaum and the 3rd President of Poland Aleksander Kwaśniewski, said: "Why should the victims and witnesses of the Holocaust have to watch what they say for fear of being arrested, and will the testimony of a Jewish survivor who "feared Poles" be a punishable offence?".[44] According to Barbara Kirshenblatt-Gimblett of the POLIN museum, "These attempts to legislate what can and cannot be said is actually destroying the good name of Poland."[45]

Stanisław Krajewski of the University of Warsaw, co-chair the Polish Council of Christians and Jews, expressed his fear that the law would become "a blunt instrument for paralysing and punishing anyone you don't like", and that "the government's harsh, dismissive reaction" would encourage violence against Jews.[46] The Polish Bishops' Conference noted a rise in anti-Semitism after the amendment was passed, declaring the phenomenon "contrary to the Christian tenet of loving one's neighbor",[47] and the Union of Jewish Religious Communities in Poland said the legislation has led to a "growing wave of intolerance, xenophobia, and anti-Semitism", making many members fearful for their safety.[48][49]

According to a survey from February 2018, 40% of Poles supported the criminal penalties in the law, while 51% felt that the issue should be addressed differently.[50]

Research has shown that the law had the perverse effect of boosting worldwide searches for the English phrase "Polish death camps" ninefold, while increasing antisemitism expression in Polish public discourse and social media.[51]

Israel

Even before being passed, the law damaged Israel–Poland relations. Israel's Foreign Ministry director-general Yuval Rotem reported that preserving the memory of the Holocaust takes priority over international relations. He said that "Preserving the memory of the Holocaust is a matter beyond the bilateral relationship between Israel and Poland. It is a core issue cutting to the essence of the Jewish people".[52] Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accused Poland of Holocaust denial.[23] Yad Vashem condemned the Polish bill, saying that, while "Polish death camps" as a phrase is a historic misrepresentation, the legislation is "liable to blur the historical truths regarding the assistance the Germans received from the Polish population during the Holocaust".[53][54]

Other Israeli officials such as Education and Diaspora Affairs Minister Naftali Bennett have termed the expression a "misrepresentation", although Bennett said of the proposed law "This is a shameful disregard of the truth. It is a historic fact that many Poles aided in the murder of Jews, handed them in, abused them, and even killed Jews during and after the Holocaust."[55] Israeli president Reuven Rivlin said in Auschwitz that historians should be able to study the Holocaust without restrictions. He also stated "There is no doubt that many Poles fought against the Nazi regime, but we cannot deny the fact that Poland and Poles lent a hand to the annihilation".[56]

Israel's official memorial to the victims of the Holocaust, Yad Vashem, has opined: "There is no doubt that the term 'Polish death camps' is a historical misrepresentation ... . However, restrictions on statements by scholars and others regarding the Polish people's direct or indirect complicity with the crimes committed on their land during the Holocaust are a serious distortion."[57][58] Israeli political scientist Shlomo Avineri said young Israelis unintentionally associate the Holocaust with Poland, sometimes far more than with Nazi Germany. Writing in Haaretz, he called for a reappraisal of Israeli Holocaust education policy, to more greatly emphasize German culpability and Polish resistance during the March of the Living.[59]

Other countries

In the U.S., Secretary of State Rex Tillerson expressed "disappointment" in the bill, adding: "Enactment of this law adversely affects freedom of speech and academic inquiry."[20]

While the American Jewish Committee (AJC) has stated that it "has been for decades critical of such harmful terms as 'Polish concentration camps' and 'Polish death camps,' recognizing that these sites were erected and managed by Nazi Germany during its occupation of Poland", AJC has also said that, "while we remember the brave Poles who saved Jews, the role of some Poles in murdering Jews cannot be ignored", and that the AJC is "firmly opposed to legislation that would penalize claims that Poland or Polish citizens bear responsibility for any Holocaust crimes".[60][61]

Scholars and historians

In February 2018, the American Historical Association released a statement calling the law "a threat both to historians' freedom of speech and to the future of historical scholarship". Their statement was later endorsed by 50 scholarly associations.[62] The Polish Center for Holocaust Research called the law an "unprecedented (and unknown in a democratic system) intrusion into the debate about the Polish history".[63]

Dovid Katz wrote that the law was "an overreaction to some common mischaracterizations of Poland's role in the Holocaust", including "the myth that Hitler chose to build concentration camps there because Poland was so antisemitic". However, he judged other Eastern European memory laws to be worse, including laws in Hungary, Lithuania, and Latvia which criminalize disagreement with the idea that there was a Soviet genocide in these countries with a prison sentence and Estonian and Ukrainian laws which criminalize negative interpretations of those countries' collaborationist nationalist movements. What he found truly outrageous was the international silence to these non-Polish "legislative acts that criminalize truth-telling about the Holocaust".[64]

Jeffrey Kopstein of the University of Toronto and Jason Wittenberg of the University of California, Berkeley, authors of the book, Intimate Violence: Anti-Jewish Pogroms on the Eve of the Holocaust, about anti-Jewish violence in occupied Poland after the Nazi invasion of Soviet Union, opine that the purpose of the new bill "is clear: to restrict discussion of Polish complicity." They also suggest that "Poland's current government will likely face the unpalatable prospect of enforcing an unenforceable law and denying what the mainstream scholarly community has increasingly shown to be true: Some Poles were complicit in the Holocaust."[65]

American jurist Alexander Tsesis criticized the law for being ambiguous, for limiting dissemination of knowledge and for being vague.[66]

Response to Article 2a
Main article: Poland–Ukraine relations

In 2019, the Constitutional Tribunal of Poland ruled that Article 2a was void and non-binding.[9]

Article 2a was criticized because the law singled out "Ukrainians" as the only national group explicitly stated to have carried out crimes, while the only action qualified as "genocide" was the massacres of Poles in Volhynia. It also was worded in such a way as to criminalize Ukrainian attacks on Polish military targets, which were not illegal under international law.[67] Klaus Bachmann states that "the discussion whether Ukrainian collaborationists committed genocide, war crimes or crimes against humanity during the last years of the war in Wolhynia, which has been ongoing for several decades, can now be interrupted by a prosecutor at any time" because anyone who disagrees that the events were genocide is liable for prosecution.[68]

The Amendment's passage worsened Polish–Ukrainian relations, already contentious on the questions of the prewar Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and the wartime and postwar Ukrainian Insurgent Army. Stepan Bandera and Roman Shukhevych have been considered Ukrainian national heroes in Ukraine, and war criminals in Poland.[69][70] In Ukraine, the Amendment has been called "the Anti-Banderovite Law".[71][72]

The Polish law has been compared to Ukrainian Law 2538-1,[73] passed in 2015.[74][75]

Controversy over mission statement

Article 1 - the mission statement of the Institute - was changed to include "protecting the reputation of the Republic of Poland and the Polish Nation".[76] Prof. Havi Dreifuss, head of Yad Vashem's Center for Research on the Holocaust in Poland, noted that: "Since the law changed, the IPN's fundamental role has changed. Today their official mission statement is to defend Poland's reputation, and it is in that light that they should be viewed."[77]

See also

References
  1. "Poland Holocaust law: Government U-turn on jail threat". BBC News. 2018-06-27. Retrieved 2023-06-04.
  2. Ahren, Raphael. "Does the Israeli-Polish Holocaust law agreement defend truth or betray history?". www.timesofisrael.com. Retrieved 2023-06-07.
  3. Hackmann, Jörg (2018). "Defending the "Good Name" of the Polish Nation: Politics of History as a Battlefield in Poland, 2015–18". Journal of Genocide Research. 20 (4): 587–606. doi:10.1080/14623528.2018.1528742. S2CID 81922100.
  4. Poland's Constitutional Breakdown, Wojciech Sadurski, Oxford University Press, page 155
  5. Soroka, George; Krawatzek, Félix (2019). "Nationalism, Democracy, and Memory Laws". Journal of Democracy. 30 (2): 157–171. doi:10.1353/jod.2019.0032. ISSN 1086-3214. S2CID 159294126.
  6. Noack, Rick (2 February 2018). "Poland's Senate passes Holocaust complicity bill despite concerns from U.S., Israel". The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 2018-02-02.
  7. Ray, Larry; Kapralski, Sławomir (2019). "Introduction to the special issue – disputed Holocaust memory in Poland". Holocaust Studies. 25 (3): 209–219. doi:10.1080/17504902.2019.1567657.
  8. Cherviatsova, Alina (2020). "Memory as a battlefield: European memorial laws and freedom of speech". The International Journal of Human Rights. 25 (4): 675–694. doi:10.1080/13642987.2020.1791826. S2CID 225574752.
  9. "Ekspert: orzeczenie Trybunału Konstytucyjnego ws. nowelizacji ustawy o IPN może otworzyć drogę do dyskusji" (in Polish). Polskie Radio 24. 17 January 2019. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  10. Koposov, Nikolay (2017). Memory Laws, Memory Wars: The Politics of the Past in Europe and Russia. Cambridge University Press. p. 162. ISBN 9781108329538.
  11. The Polish 'Holocaust Law' revisited: The Devastating Effects of Prejudice-Mongering, Marta Bucholc and Maciej Komornik, Cultures of History, 19 February 2019
  12. Rzepa, Joanna. "Translation, conflict and the politics of memory: Jan Karski's Story of a Secret State." Translation Studies 11.3 (2018): 315-332.
  13. "Projekt ustawy o zmianie ustawy o Instytucie Pamięci Narodowej - Komisji Ścigania Zbrodni przeciwko Narodowi Polskiemu oraz ustawy o odpowiedzialności podmiotów zbiorowych za czyny zabronione pod groźbą kary". legislacja.rcl.gov.pl (in Polish). Government Legislation Centre. 1 March 2016. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  14. "Poland approves bill outlawing phrase 'Polish death camps'". The Guardian. Associated Press. 16 August 2016. Retrieved 4 September 2016.
  15. Noack, Rick (17 August 2016). "Obama once referred to a 'Polish death camp.' In Poland, that could soon be punishable by 3 years in prison". The Washington Post. Retrieved 4 September 2016.
  16. "Sejm uchwalił ustawę o penalizacji banderyzmu". Do Rzeczy (in Polish). 26 January 2018. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  17. "Kukiz oskarża kierownictwo PiS o uległość wobec spadkobierców Bandery". Do Rzeczy (in Polish). 11 June 2017. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  18. "Druk nr 993-A". sejm.gov.pl (in Polish). Sejm of the Republic of Poland. 26 January 2018. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  19. "Ustawa z dnia 26 stycznia 2018 r. o zmianie ustawy o Instytucie Pamięci Narodowej – Komisji Ścigania Zbrodni przeciwko Narodowi Polskiemu, ustawy o grobach i cmentarzach wojennych, ustawy o muzeach oraz ustawy o odpowiedzialności podmiotów zbiorowych za czyny zabronione pod groźbą kary" (PDF). orka.sejm.gov.pl (in Polish). Sejm of the Republic of Poland. 29 January 2018. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2019-04-29. Retrieved 2018-02-02.
  20. Noack, Rick (6 February 2018). "Polish president signs Holocaust bill, drawing rare U.S. rebuke". The Washington Post. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  21. Szwedowicz, Agata (16 February 2018). "CBOS: 40 proc. Polaków jest za nowelą ustawy o IPN, 51 proc. uważa, że dezinformacji należy przeciwdziałać inaczej". dzieje.pl (in Polish). Museum of Polish History. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  22. Masters, James (8 February 2018). "Polish President signs controversial Holocaust bill into law". CNN. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  23. Eglash, Ruth; Selk, Avi (28 January 2018). "Israel and Poland try to tamp down tensions after Poland's 'death camp' law sparks Israeli outrage". The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 2018-01-28.
  24. Koposov, Nikolay (16 March 2018). "Is Poland's New Memory Law a Case of Holocaust Denial?". fifteeneightyfour. Cambridge University Press. Retrieved 3 January 2021. the statute makes it illegal to claim that ethnic Poles were in any way involved in the Holocaust. According to Polish prime minister Mateusz Morawiecki, such claims are a form of Holocaust denial. But it is more accurate to say that the Polish law itself is a manifestation of Holocaust negationism.
  25. Ynet, Associated Press and (1 February 2018). "Israeli politicians, survivors blast Polish Holocaust law". Ynetnews. Ynet and Associated Press. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  26. "Ustawa z dnia 18 grudnia 1998 r. o Instytucie Pamięci Narodowej — Komisji Ścigania Zbrodni przeciwko Narodowi Polskiemu" (PDF). Dziennik Ustaw (in Polish). No. 155. 19 December 1998. 1016. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  27. "Full text of Poland's controversial Holocaust legislation". 1 February 2018. Retrieved 2 January 2021.
  28. Gauba, Kanika. "Rethinking 'Memory Laws' from a Comparative Perspective." The Indian Yearbook of Comparative Law 2018. Springer, Singapore, 2019. 233-249.
  29. "Szklarski, Bohdan, and Piotr Ilowski. "Searching for Solid Ground in Polish-American Relations in the Second Year of the Trump Administration." (2019): 65-82" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2019-08-27. Retrieved 2019-08-27.
  30. Jaraczewski, Jakub (23 July 2018). "Fast Random-Access Memory (Laws) – The June 2018 Amendments to the Polish "Holocaust Law"". Verfassungsblog. Retrieved 2 January 2021.
  31. Bucholc, Marta (2019). "Commemorative Lawmaking: Memory Frames of the Democratic Backsliding in Poland After 2015". Hague Journal on the Rule of Law. 11 (1): 85–110. doi:10.1007/s40803-018-0080-7. S2CID 158265814.
  32. Tsesis, Alexander (2020). "Genocide Censorship and Genocide Denial". In Grzebyk, Patrycja (ed.). Responsibility for Negation of International Crimes. Warsaw: Institute of Justice in Warsaw. p. 117. ISBN 9788366344433. Far more controversial than genocide denial laws, however, have been national efforts to censor evidence of complicity to commit genocide, and this is the case with civil legislation in Poland and the criminal law in Turkey... The newest version of the law, passed on June 6, 2019, continues to have a civil cause of action that can be brought by private citizens of the Law on Institute of National Remembrance (Art. 53o and 53p). The problem, then, has not been fully resolved, despite the 2019 changes, because defense of nationalistic honor continues to function as a censor on speech. The Law on Institute of National Remembrance is likely to have some of the same negative impacts as the Turkish censorship statute protecting national honor.
  33. Belavusau, Uladzislau (12 December 2018). "The Rise of Memory Laws in Poland: An Adequate Tool to Counter Historical Disinformation?". Security and Human Rights. 29 (1–4): 36–54. doi:10.1163/18750230-02901011. ISSN 1875-0230. S2CID 216759925. The argument of the Polish government that all Western European countries have been legally protecting the memory of the Holocaust in the same way is at best misleading. The closest relative of the 2018 Law is not a standard provision in continental Europe's criminal codes about punitive measures against Holocaust deniers. Rather, the closest sibling of the Law are parts of the Turkish and Russian penal codes. The way the Law frames the defence of collective Polish dignity in a historical context is foremost reminiscent of the notorious provision in the Turkish criminal code (Article 301), which criminalises denigration of the Turkish nation and is particularly used to silence people speaking out against the massacres of Armenians and other minorities by the Ottoman Empire in 1915.
  34. Cherviatsova, Alina (2020). "Memory as a battlefield: European memorial laws and freedom of speech". The International Journal of Human Rights. 25 (4): 675–694. doi:10.1080/13642987.2020.1791826. S2CID 225574752. The Turkish, Russian, Polish and Ukrainian cases do not exhaust the list of historical discussions limited by memorial laws for the sake of glory of the past but nevertheless reflect a dangerous tendency towards the manipulative use of history, the rise of national populism and a precipitous decline in democratic values.
  35. Aleksandra Gliszczyńska-Grabias, Grażyna Baranowska, Anna Wójcik (2019). "Law-Secured Narratives of the Past in Poland in Light of International Human Rights Law Standards". POLISH YEARBOOK OF International Law. doi:10.24425/pyil.2019.129606. S2CID 217067626.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  36. Grzebyk, Patrycja (2018). "Amendments of January 2018 to the Act on the Institute of National Remembrance – Commission for the Prosecution of Crimes against the Polish Nation in Light of International Law". Polish Yearbook of International Law. 37: 287–300. doi:10.7420/pyil2017o.
  37. Tsesis, Alexander (2020). "Genocide Censorship and Genocide Denial". In Grzebyk, Patrycja (ed.). Responsibility for Negation of International Crimes. Warsaw: Institute of Justice in Warsaw. p. 117-118. ISBN 9788366344433.
  38. Koncewicz, Tomasz Tadeusz (2018). "On the Politics of Resentment, Mis-memory, and Constitutional Fidelity: The Demise of the Polish Overlapping Consensus?". Law and Memory: Towards Legal Governance of History. Cambridge University Press. pp. 263–290. ISBN 978-1-107-18875-4.
  39. Sadurski 2019 p. 156
  40. Sadurski, Wojciech (16 May 2019). Poland's Constitutional Breakdown. Oxford University Press. p. 155. ISBN 978-0-19-884050-3.
  41. Małecki, Mikołaj; Mikuli, Piotr (2018). "The New Polish 'Memory Law': A Short Critical Analysis". DPCE Online. 34 (1). ISSN 2037-6677.
  42. "President says Poland did not take part in the Holocaust". The Washington Post. Associated Press. 29 January 2018. Archived from the original on 30 January 2018. Retrieved 2 February 2018.
  43. Pawlak, Justyna; Kelly, Lidia (31 January 2018). "Polish lawmakers back Holocaust bill, drawing Israeli outrage, U.S. concern". Reuters UK. Retrieved 2 February 2018.
  44. "Polish law denies reality of Holocaust". The Guardian. 5 February 2018. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  45. "'Polish death camps': Outlawing phrase will protect Poland's good name, says minister | CBC Radio". CBC. Retrieved 19 October 2020.
  46. Luxmoore, Jonathan (14 March 2018). "Polish archbishop answers Holocaust law critics". The Tablet. Retrieved 2018-05-12.
  47. "Catholic, Jewish leaders in Poland seek to reduce tensions". The Washington Post. 15 March 2018. Archived from the original on 15 March 2018.
  48. Masters, James; Mortensen, Antonia (20 February 2018). "Poland's Jewish groups say Jews feel unsafe since new Holocaust law". CNN. Retrieved 11 November 2018.
  49. "Oświadczenie organizacji żydowskich do opinii publicznej / Open statement of Polish Jewish organizations to the public opinion". Jewish.org.pl (in Polish). Retrieved 13 March 2018.
  50. The amendment to the Institute of National Remembrance act Centre for Public Opinion Research
  51. "Analiza skutków noweli ustawy o IPN: wzmożenie antysemickie w debacie publicznej". Rzecznik Praw Obywatelskich (in Polish). 13 June 2018. Retrieved 2 January 2021.
  52. Halon, Eytan (3 March 2018). "Argentina newspaper first target of controversial Polish Holocaust law". The Jerusalem Post. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  53. "Yad Vashem: Poland Holocaust law risks 'serious distortion' of Polish complicity". The Times of Israel. 27 January 2018. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  54. "Israel criticises Poland over draft Holocaust legislation". The Guardian. Associated Press. 27 January 2018. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  55. "Israel criticises Polish Holocaust law". BBC News. 28 January 2018. Retrieved 28 January 2018.
  56. Aderet, Ofer (12 April 2018). "Israeli President to Polish Counterpart: We Cannot Deny That Poland and Poles Participated in Holocaust". Haaretz. Retrieved 11 November 2018.
  57. "Fury in Israel as Poland proposes ban on referring to Nazi death camps as 'Polish'". The Daily Telegraph. 28 January 2018. Retrieved 28 January 2018.
  58. "Yad Vashem Response to the Law Passed in Poland Yesterday". Yad Vashem. 27 January 2018. Retrieved 11 November 2018.
  59. Avineri, Shlomo (5 March 2018). "Opinion: Holocaust Trips to Poland for Israeli Youth Should Start in Germany". Haaretz. Retrieved 14 March 2018.
  60. "AJC Opposes Polish Effort to Criminalize Claims of Holocaust Responsibility". American Jewish Committee. 27 January 2018. Retrieved 11 November 2018 – via PRNewswire.
  61. Tibon, Amir (27 January 2018). "As Poland's New Holocaust Law Causes Storm, U.S. Urges 'Never Again' on Holocaust Remembrance Day". Haaretz. Retrieved 11 November 2018.
  62. "Advocacy Briefs: AHA Condemns Polish Law Criminalizing Public Discussion of Polish Complicity in Nazi War Crimes | Perspectives on History | AHA". www.historians.org. Retrieved 3 January 2021.
  63. "Historians fear 'censorship' under Poland's Holocaust law". Times Higher Education (THE). 21 February 2018. Retrieved 3 January 2021.
  64. Katz, Dovid (25 April 2018). "Poland's New Holocaust Law Is Bad, But Not the Worst". Jewish Currents. Retrieved 26 October 2020.
  65. Wittenberg, Jason; Kopstein, Jeffrey (2 February 2018). "Yes, some Poles were Nazi collaborators. The Polish Parliament is trying to legislate that away". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on 2018-02-02. Retrieved 2018-02-02.
  66. Tsesis 2020 pp. 117–118
  67. Grzebyk, Patrycja (2018). "Amendments of January 2018 to the Act on the Institute of National Remembrance – Commission for the Prosecution of Crimes against the Polish Nation in Light of International Law". Polish Yearbook of International Law. 37: 287–300. doi:10.7420/pyil2017o. As a result of the amendments, Ukrainians are the only national group directlymentioned in the Act as perpetrators of crimes, and the Act does not refer even toGermans or Russians but instead prefers to speak about crimes of the "Third Reich" or of the "communists." Not surprisingly, Ukrainians have felt offended by this "distinction."
  68. Klaus Bachmann Civil Law and the Amendment of German and Polish Memory Laws p. 177
  69. Baran, Violetta, ed. (6 February 2018). "Były minister obrony Ukrainy ostrzega: ponad milion Ukraińców może chwycić za kopie" [Former Ukrainian Minister of Defense Warns: over a million Ukrainians may take up the cudgels]. WP Wiadomości (in Polish). Wirtualna Polska. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  70. Kozińska, Anna, ed. (1 February 2018). "Spór na linii Polska-Izrael. Do grona komentatorów dołączyła Ukraina". WP Wiadomości (in Polish). Wirtualna Polska. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  71. Baran, Violetta, ed. (6 February 2018). "Ukraińskie media o oświadczeniu prezydenta Dudy: słowo Ukraina nawet nie padło". WP Wiadomości (in Polish). Wirtualna Polska. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  72. "Польські депутати вночі прийняли закон про заборону "бандерівської ідеології"" [Tonight Polish Parliamentaries Passed the Law on the Ban of the "Banderovite Ideology"]. Dzerkalo Tyzhnia (in Ukrainian). 1 February 2018. Retrieved 2019-05-16.
  73. "Проект Закону про правовий статус та вшанування пам'яті борців за незалежність України у ХХ столітті". w1.c1.rada.gov.ua (in Ukrainian). Verkhovna Rada. Retrieved 2018-02-10.
  74. Liphshiz, Cnaan (6 February 2018). "Poland isn't the only country trying to police what can be said about the Holocaust". Jewish Telegraphic Agency. Retrieved 2018-02-10.
  75. Rudling, Anders; Gilley, Christopher (29 April 2015). "Laws 2558 and 2538-1: On Critical Inquiry, the Holocaust, and Academic Freedom in Ukraine". ukraine.politicalcritique.org. Retrieved 2018-02-10.
  76. "Full text of Poland's controversial Holocaust legislation". Times of Israel. 2018-02-01. Retrieved 2019-10-04.
  77. Benjakob, Omer (2019-10-03). "The Fake Nazi Death Camp: Wikipedia's Longest Hoax, Exposed". Haaretz. Retrieved 2019-10-04.

Further reading
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.