Today a Warsaw court delivered a final judgment acquitting Wojciech Biedroń, a journalist with wPolityce.pl and Telewizja wPolsce. The prosecution had been pursued by Bartosz Kramek and Ludmiła Kozłowska, but the court ruled that there was no basis for a criminal conviction. This ruling marks a definitive end to this particular lawsuit and stands as another instance in which Open Dialog Foundation activists faced losses in actions against journalists from the same outlet.
READ ALSO: OUR NEWS. The journalist from wPolityce.pl did not defame Kramek, Kozłowska and the FPS. The court invoked the constitutional right to freedom of expression
This development is another setback for Open Dialog Foundation campaigners, who have pursued legal challenges against journalists from the weekly Sieci and the portal wPolityce.pl under Article 212 of the Polish Criminal Code. Critics argue that this provision has been used as a tool to silence independent media. Biedroń faced allegations tied to a series of articles published in 2018 and 2019. The materials reportedly disclosed information that was inconvenient or uncomfortable for Kramek and Kozłowska, highlighting their activities both in Poland and abroad.
In confirming the Court of First Instance, the Warsaw court underscored that freedom of expression is a protected right under both Polish and European jurisprudence. It stated that the authors’ opinions, even when they diverge from the views of certain figures, should not be punishable. The judge emphasized that journalists, regardless of the subject matter of their reporting, are safeguarded by the European Convention on Human Rights. The court noted that the same principle was echoed earlier by the Court of First Instance.
The acquittal is welcomed by supporters of free expression who view this outcome as a necessary check on criminal prosecutions aimed at curbing journalistic independence. It also presents a contrast to narratives seen abroad, where human rights advocates sometimes describe themselves as champions of freedoms that face scrutiny at home. Today’s decision is viewed by many as a reaffirmation that the press can operate without fear of criminal penalties for expressing controversial or critical viewpoints.
The journalist from wPolityce.pl was described as achieving a significant legal victory, following a prior acquittal in a similar matter involving colleagues Marek Pyza and Marcin Wikła. Observers see this sequence as an increasing pattern of judicial protection for reporters who seek to publish information in the public interest, even when such material touches on sensitive topics or powerful figures.
In discussing the verdict, commentators suggest that the outcome contributes to a broader understanding of speech rights, particularly in relation to political content. The court’s decision is viewed as upholding a standard that allows the press to challenge public figures and disclose facts without facing criminal penalties merely for presenting opinions or reporting on activities that some may find controversial. Such a framework supports a media landscape where critical reporting can continue without intimidation.
The legal cases around these issues continue to fuel debates about the balance between reputation protection and the right to free expression. Supporters of press freedom stress that robust journalism relies on the ability to investigate, report, and comment on public affairs, while critics argue that responsible reporting must be tempered with accuracy and accountability. Today’s ruling contributes to the ongoing conversation by reinforcing the principle that opinions and information documented in journalistic work should generally not be criminalized simply because they are uncomfortable for certain individuals.
Overall, this acquittal reinforces the expectation that courts will evaluate journalistic material on its factual basis and lawful expression, rather than on a desire to suppress coverage seen as disadvantageous to particular interests. It is a reminder that, in democratic societies, the protection of free expression often stands as a cornerstone of public accountability and civil rights.
– Wojciech Biedroń commented on the verdict, stressing the importance of media freedom and the role of the press in a healthy public sphere.
The experience of wPolityce.pl reporters in court underscores a broader narrative of media resilience and the ongoing tension between accountability and expression in high-stakes reporting.