Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Права ЛГБТ у Польщі" in Ukrainian language version.
This brief overview concentrates on some problematic issues regarding the interpretation of provisions implementing the EU general principle of equal treatment.58 However, the overall picture emerging from these detail-focused considerations is that the principle of equal treatment in Poland appears generally ineffective. State authorities, predominantly the government ruling since 2015, have endeavoured to deprive anti-discrimination provisions (mostly enacted in the process of implementation of EU law) of any practical significance, whereas courts were neither eager nor able to resist this process, to put it delicately.
This brief overview concentrates on some problematic issues regarding the interpretation of provisions implementing the EU general principle of equal treatment.58 However, the overall picture emerging from these detail-focused considerations is that the principle of equal treatment in Poland appears generally ineffective. State authorities, predominantly the government ruling since 2015, have endeavoured to deprive anti-discrimination provisions (mostly enacted in the process of implementation of EU law) of any practical significance, whereas courts were neither eager nor able to resist this process, to put it delicately.
This brief overview concentrates on some problematic issues regarding the interpretation of provisions implementing the EU general principle of equal treatment.58 However, the overall picture emerging from these detail-focused considerations is that the principle of equal treatment in Poland appears generally ineffective. State authorities, predominantly the government ruling since 2015, have endeavoured to deprive anti-discrimination provisions (mostly enacted in the process of implementation of EU law) of any practical significance, whereas courts were neither eager nor able to resist this process, to put it delicately.
Article 18 of the Polish Constitution limits the institution of marriage to opposite-sex couples.
55 proc. Polaków jest przeciwna prawnemu umożliwieniu zawierania związków partnerskich przez osoby tej samej płci. [55% Poles are against the legal possibility of same-sex partnerships.]
This brief overview concentrates on some problematic issues regarding the interpretation of provisions implementing the EU general principle of equal treatment.58 However, the overall picture emerging from these detail-focused considerations is that the principle of equal treatment in Poland appears generally ineffective. State authorities, predominantly the government ruling since 2015, have endeavoured to deprive anti-discrimination provisions (mostly enacted in the process of implementation of EU law) of any practical significance, whereas courts were neither eager nor able to resist this process, to put it delicately.
This brief overview concentrates on some problematic issues regarding the interpretation of provisions implementing the EU general principle of equal treatment.58 However, the overall picture emerging from these detail-focused considerations is that the principle of equal treatment in Poland appears generally ineffective. State authorities, predominantly the government ruling since 2015, have endeavoured to deprive anti-discrimination provisions (mostly enacted in the process of implementation of EU law) of any practical significance, whereas courts were neither eager nor able to resist this process, to put it delicately.
This brief overview concentrates on some problematic issues regarding the interpretation of provisions implementing the EU general principle of equal treatment.58 However, the overall picture emerging from these detail-focused considerations is that the principle of equal treatment in Poland appears generally ineffective. State authorities, predominantly the government ruling since 2015, have endeavoured to deprive anti-discrimination provisions (mostly enacted in the process of implementation of EU law) of any practical significance, whereas courts were neither eager nor able to resist this process, to put it delicately.
art. 18 Konstytucji RP, który definiuje małżeństwo jako związek kobiety i mężczyzny, a tym samym wynika z niego zasada nakazująca jako małżeństwo traktować w Polsce jedynie związek heteroseksualny.
aż 60 proc. pytanych uważa, że para gejów lub lesbijek powinna mieć prawo do związku partnerskiego [up to 60 percent respondents believe that a gay or lesbian couple should have the right to a partnership]
Ustawa o świadczeniach zdrowotnych finansowanych ze środków publicznych nie wyjaśnia, co prawda, kto jest małżonkiem. Pojęcie to zostało jednak dostatecznie i jasno określone we wspomnianym art. 18 Konstytucji RP, w którym jest mowa o małżeństwie jako o związku kobiety i mężczyzny. W piśmiennictwie podkreśla się, że art. 18 Konstytucji ustala zasadę heteroseksualności małżeństwa, będącą nie tyle zasadą ustroju, co normą prawną, która zakazuje ustawodawcy zwykłemu nadawania charakteru małżeństwa związkom pomiędzy osobami jednej płci (vide: L. Garlicki Komentarz do art. 18 Konstytucji, s. 2-3 [w:] Konstytucja Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej. Komentarz, Wydawnictwo Sejmowe, Warszawa 2003). Jest wobec tego oczywiste, że małżeństwem w świetle Konstytucji i co za tym idzie - w świetle polskiego prawa, może być i jest wyłącznie związek heteroseksualny, a więc w związku małżeńskim małżonkami nie mogą być osoby tej samej płci.
Polska Konstytucja określa bowiem małżeństwo jako związek wyłącznie kobiety i mężczyzny. A contrario nie dopuszcza więc związków jednopłciowych. [...] Małżeństwo (jako związek kobiety i mężczyzny) uzyskało w prawie krajowym RP odrębny status konstytucyjny zdeterminowany postanowieniami art. 18 Konstytucji. Zmiana tego statusu byłaby możliwa jedynie przy zachowaniu rygorów trybu zmiany Konstytucji, określonych w art. 235 tego aktu.
W doktrynie prawa konstytucyjnego wskazuje się nadto, że jedyny element normatywny, dający się odkodować z art. 18 Konstytucji, to ustalenie zasady heteroseksualności małżeństwa.
This brief overview concentrates on some problematic issues regarding the interpretation of provisions implementing the EU general principle of equal treatment.58 However, the overall picture emerging from these detail-focused considerations is that the principle of equal treatment in Poland appears generally ineffective. State authorities, predominantly the government ruling since 2015, have endeavoured to deprive anti-discrimination provisions (mostly enacted in the process of implementation of EU law) of any practical significance, whereas courts were neither eager nor able to resist this process, to put it delicately.
This brief overview concentrates on some problematic issues regarding the interpretation of provisions implementing the EU general principle of equal treatment.58 However, the overall picture emerging from these detail-focused considerations is that the principle of equal treatment in Poland appears generally ineffective. State authorities, predominantly the government ruling since 2015, have endeavoured to deprive anti-discrimination provisions (mostly enacted in the process of implementation of EU law) of any practical significance, whereas courts were neither eager nor able to resist this process, to put it delicately.
This brief overview concentrates on some problematic issues regarding the interpretation of provisions implementing the EU general principle of equal treatment.58 However, the overall picture emerging from these detail-focused considerations is that the principle of equal treatment in Poland appears generally ineffective. State authorities, predominantly the government ruling since 2015, have endeavoured to deprive anti-discrimination provisions (mostly enacted in the process of implementation of EU law) of any practical significance, whereas courts were neither eager nor able to resist this process, to put it delicately.
