The internet, as a means of mass communication, allows for expressing opinions in an almost unlimited way. Because of this, it enables people to publicly insult users on websites, express unfavorable opinions about a topic or a person, and even incite hatred and discrimination based on race, nationality, religion, or ethnicity.
Such behavior is known as “online hate.”
“Hejt” is a Polish term derived from the English word “hate,” which means nothing other than hatred. There are many definitions of hate speech; generally speaking, hate can be defined as an offensive and often aggressive online comment or expressing oneself in a hostile and aggressive manner about a topic, person, or social group. However, hate does not necessarily have to take the form of an online comment; it can also be, for example, an offensive image, meme, or video. Hate is often vulgar, crosses the boundaries of constructive criticism, and exceeds the limits of polite expression.
When publishing any information online—especially on social media platforms—that even indirectly concerns other people, it is worth considering whether it infringes on someone else’s good name. It should also be added that spreading even true information can lead to a lawsuit for the violation of personal rights.
According to the Civil Code (Article 23), personal rights include “in particular health, freedom, honor, freedom of conscience, name or pseudonym, image, secrecy of correspondence, inviolability of the home, scientific, artistic, inventive, and rationalizing creativity.” These are the most important non-property rights belonging to every person, which are protected by civil law. Every individual is guaranteed protection of their personal rights.
Personal rights violated by hate speech include dignity and good name for individuals, and reputation for legal entities. In both cases, these rights are protected. Both individuals and legal entities have the guaranteed right not to be subjected to judgments that could unjustly expose them to the loss of good name, reputation, or trust necessary for the smooth functioning of their activities.
When initiating civil proceedings with a claim for the protection of personal rights, the person affected by the violation can primarily seek to cease the infringement by removing the unlawful post published on the website.
Besides demanding the removal of the violation of personal rights, it is also possible to request that the responsible party take actions aimed at removing the consequences of the infringement. Under this entitlement, one can, in particular, demand:
- submission of a statement with appropriate content and in the proper form – under this claim, one can demand the correction of false accusations or information published on the portal, as well as an apology for the violation of good name or reputation. Such statements may be published on the website where the violation occurred;
- monetary compensation or payment of an appropriate sum of money to a designated social cause;
- payment of damages in cases where the violation of personal rights has caused financial harm to the recipient of the hate speech.
With the development of the Internet and social media, more and more of our activities, including professional ones, are moving online. Consequently, an increasing number of legal disputes over the violation of personal rights concern posts, statements, and videos published on various forums and profiles on Instagram, Facebook, or YouTube. It is important to remember that the Internet today is gradually replacing traditional media such as television and newspapers. Unfortunately, some people still believe they are “anonymous” online, which makes it easy for them to insult others, expecting to remain unpunished. In response to the growth of social media and online activity, the Polish legislator has also begun working on amending regulations regarding the protection of personal rights.
Draft amendment of the regulations – the so-called Blind Lawsuit
The Sejm has just begun work on the so-called “blind lawsuits” bill. On the table is also a much broader draft aimed at combating online hate speech.
In short, the proposed regulations allow for filing a lawsuit for the violation of personal rights even when the plaintiff does not know the defendant’s information. Currently, such a lawsuit is subject to dismissal. When filing a so-called blind lawsuit, the obligation to obtain the defendant’s data falls on the court, which will have to request this information from internet service providers or telecommunications companies.
The main goal of the proposed regulations is to provide faster and more effective protection for individuals whose personal rights have been violated as a result of actions taken in the digital space, especially on online platforms. This draft complements the mechanisms set out in the provisions of the EU Digital Services Act (DSA), introduced to combat illegal content by intermediary service providers.
Thus, instead of a single new separate procedure, there could be as many as three proceedings concerning violations related to the dissemination of illegal content:
– against individuals with a known identity,
– against individuals with an unidentified identity,
– against intermediary service providers.
So, we are left to wait for the outcome of the legislative work and the changes in this area! And let’s not forget — we are not anonymous on the Internet. It’s also important to remember that legal remedies to fight hate speech are already available to us.