Communicated on 10 April 2018

FIRST SECTION

Application no. 45561/17 Agnieszka LECHOWICZ against Poland lodged on 19 June 2017

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, Ms Agnieszka Lechowicz , is a Polish national who was born in 1976 and lives in Jędrzejów .

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

A. Background

The applicant is an animal rights activist and the president of the Association for Protection of Animals ( Stowarzyszenie Obrony ZwierzÄ…t ). She is involved in protecting stray animals in Poland by means of monitoring the actions of state and local authorities, and of commenting on the legislative process in their area of interest.

K.Ś.L. is the president of another local pro-animal organisation, the Mondo Cane Foundation, assistant to a Member of Parliament and the author of amendments to the law on the protection of animals. In 2014 K.Ś.L. called publicly on pro-animal organisations to support her latest draft amendments to the law, which she claimed had been submitted to the Parliament and supported by the Ministry of the Environment and the Supreme Audit Chamber ( Najwyższa Izba Kontroli ). The applicants claimed that the draft amendments in question had formally been non-existent and, as such, unsupported by the authorities concerned.

On 26 December 2014 the applicant, together with other pro ‑ animal activists, wrote and signed an open letter entitled “Watch out for a cheat” ( Uwaga na oszusta ). The letter contained the following statements, in so far as relevant:

“Ms K.Ś.L. [full name] ... is writing about a draft [law] which “for a year has been waiting in [Parliament]”. Everyone can check that, apart from the citizens ’ draft of 2011, no other draft is waiting in [Parliament] ... such statements cause anxiety because Ms K.Ś.L., acting in a similar manner, managed already in 2011 to worsen the law on the protection of animals. As an activist of the “Emir” Foundation and as assistant to the M.P. [full name], she had obtained wide support from social organisations for the draft [law]... which was adopted by [Parliament] ... An enthusiastic march of animal lovers to [Parliament] on the day of the vote on the damaging law was an outstanding masterpiece of propaganda fraud ( wybitnym dziełem propagandowego oszustwa ) ... Ms K.Ś.L. ’ s call is deceitful ( oszukańczy ) because [she] does not want to create any law for the protection of animals. [She] only wants to make political use, before the elections, of the public outrage at the lack [of the law]. [She] wants her initiative to succeed because, by increasing chaos, contradictions and inconsistencies, [she] protects civil servants and lets various lobbies make money ...”

The letter was sent by email to approximately seventy-seven local organisations for the protection of animals.

B. Conviction for defamation

On 15 July 2016 the Gdynia District Court ( SÄ…d Rejonowy ) convicted the applicant of the misdemeanour of defamation on account of her having signed the open letter described above, in which K.Åš.L. was called a cheat. The applicant was sentenced to a fine in the amount of 10,000 Polish zlotys (PLN) (approximately 2,500 euros, (EUR)) conditionally suspended for two years, and to a supplementary payment in favour of the Mondo Cane Foundation in the amount of PLN 5,000 (EUR 1,250). The applicant was also ordered to make a public apology to K.Åš.L. The applicant was charged PLN 2,000 (EUR 500) in court fees.

The applicant waived her right to make any submissions. One of her co ‑ defendants argued that the information about K.Åš.L. in the letter in question was true.

On the basis of various pieces of evidence, the court made the following findings of fact. In 2011 K.Ś.L. had organised a rally in support of amendments to the law on the protection of animals. In 2013, assisting the MP, she had called on various pro-animal organisations to submit proposals for further amendments to that law. In 2015 she had called on these organisations, through social networking sites, to support her request for acceleration of the amendments of the draft law “which has for over a year been waiting in [Parliament]”. She also posted a statement to the effect that the draft amendments were the initiative of the members of parliament and that they had the approval of the Minister of the Environment and of the Supreme Audit Chamber. None of these authorities had, in fact, given any opinions or made any comments on the draft law. The draft law had not formally been submitted to Parliament but was at the political consultation stage.

On the merits, the court firstly observed that the adamant and accusatory statements which the applicant had made in her letter of 26 December 2014 were defamatory. They described K.Ś.L as a dishonest and untrustworthy person, they tainted her public image and put her at risk of losing the public trust necessary for her work. Secondly, the court considered that the defendants had failed to prove that their statements were true. The draft law in question had indeed, albeit informally, been debated for over a year by MPs and, even if the applicant had had doubts about the legislative process, she should have asked K.Ś.L. to explain or rectify her statements. In any event, the applicant ’ s letter did not focus on the inaccuracies regarding the legislative process or the approval of various governmental bodies but rather on the remainder of K.Ś.L. ’ s public activities. It followed that the applicant had acted with the intention of harming K.Ś.L ’ s reputation. Consequently, the court found the applicant guilty of defamation within the meaning of Article 212 of the Penal Code ( Kodeks Karny ).

The applicant lodged an appeal against that judgment, arguing inter alia that the first-instance court had erred in holding that the letter in question was aimed at defaming K.Åš.L; that the statements which it contained were untrue; that various defence motions for evidence had been rejected.

On 19 December 2016 the Gdańsk Regional Court ( Sąd Okręgowy ) entirely upheld the findings of fact and law of the first-instance court. The appellate court ordered the applicant to pay 420 PLN (105 EUR) in costs for the proceedings.

COMPLAINT

The applicant complains that punishing her for defamation had a chilling effect and breached her right to freedom of expression protected by Article 10 of the Convention. In particular she submits that the impugned statements were raised during a public debate and that there was no good reason for putting the protection of K.Ś.L. ’ s rights above her right to freedom of expression. Moreover, she claims that her letter contained true information about the activities of K.Ś.L. and that, by using strong language, she aimed to provoke organisations to take part in the discussion and, ultimately, to make the legislative process more transparent and thorough.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Has there been a violation of the applicant ’ s right to freedom of expression, contrary to Article 10 of the Convention (see, among many others, mutatis mutandis , Sokołowski v. Poland , no. 75955/01, 29 March 2005) ?

2. The parties are also requested to submit a copy of the applicant ’ s appeal against the judgment of the Gdynia District Court of 15 July 2016.