Konstytucyjny zakaz cenzury prewencyjnej : przyczynek do dyskusji

Abstract

In the light of the categorical formulation of Art. 54 paragraph 2 of the Constitution of 1997 any exception to the prohibition of preventive censorship is unacceptable. Hence the conclusion that the absolute prohibition of preventive censorship implied in the current Basic Law protects freedom of speech in the media at a higher level than required by the standards developed on the basis of the European Convention on Human Rights or Amendment I to the United States Constitution. This, however, does not change the fact that the prohibition is circumvented with the use of institutions and procedures, serving the same purpose and fulfilling analogous functions of preventive censorship. The above mentioned equivalent, in a sense, institutions and procedures must be assessed themselves as to their possible non‑compliance with constitutional norms, because formally ban on preventive censorship does not apply to them. I am primarily referring to: an injunction on publication; excessive penalization for activities of journalists, which may cause the so‑called ‘chilling effect’ in the form of specific auto‑censorship of the authors of press releases discouraging from participation in public debate; the institution of the authorization; ban on publishing information connected with the private sphere of life.