The Constitutional Tribunal ruled on a provision under which an employee of the Łódź printing house Adam J. was found guilty of an offence in 2017 after refusing to print promotional materials for the LGBT Foundation. He did it for religious reasons.

The Court held that the provision providing for punishment of someone who, while professionally providing services, „intentionally refuses to provide the service he is obliged to provide without due cause” constitutes interference with the freedom of the entity providing services, in particular the right to act according to his or her own conscience.

In that regard, the Constitutional Tribunal stressed that the freedoms restricted by the contested provision are no less important than protection against discrimination. The legislator may use milder but more effective means of protection against discrimination

— it marked.

In his justification, Judge Muszyński also said that the contested article does not pursue an anti-discrimination objective, as there is no clear indication in this provision that it concerns discriminatory issues.

According to the Constitutional Tribunal, the existence of that rule is not necessary either for the protection of consumer interests or for protection against acts of discrimination

— underlined the Constitutional Tribunal.

The Court also held that the contested provision is not useful for the protection of consumers’ tangible and intangible economic interests.

Penalties for refusal to provide a service do not constitute a fundamental interest of the consumer, which is the objective of the service being provided

— indicated Muszyński.

In December 2017, Zbigniew Ziobro, Attorney General, filed a motion to the Constitutional Tribunal in this matter. In his opinion, it was unconstitutional to understand this regulation in such a way that „the principles of faith and conscience are not a justified reason for refusing to provide a service”.

Tłum.K.J.