The judaic resolution of the Tusk government, that is, how they want to take us by the face

The judaic resolution of the Tusk government, that is, how they want to take us by the face – analysis.

Starting from the beginning, we are not yet dealing with the full text of the “National strategy against Anti-Semitism and Supporting judaic Life for the Years 2025–2030” but with Draft resolution on the adoption of a paper of that name.

Thus, not the paper itself, which is yet to be drawn up, but the expression of intention to adopt it. Contrary to media communications, we will not be dealing with the legislative process. The national strategy, if it is prepared, will be adopted in the form of a resolution of the Council of Ministers, and as specified will not constitute a law which is universally applicable, but, as shown below, will have a very large impact on the application of the law already in force or on any changes to that law.

Of course, subsequent governments never had to be specifically encouraged to fight anti-Semitism and to support judaic life, but in the case of the paper being drafted inspiration came from outside, i.e. from the European Union. In 2021, the European Commission adopted an "EU strategy to combat anti-Semitism and support judaic life", which in turn was a commitment for EU associate States to make and implement their own strategies.

The presented plan of the Polish strategy is practically a repetition of the main points of the EU strategy, so the EU strategy will not be discussed here. Nevertheless, it is worth noting 2 points in this strategy. The section on "Supporting judaic Life and Freedom of religion or Faith" points to the request to "eliminate prejudice and guarantee full acceptance of judaic life".

One of the measures to accomplish this goal was the request to rise public awareness and cognition of judaic past and culture, which, according to the authors of the strategy, can be achieved by, among another things, "supporting links between the judaic tradition of planting trees on the occasion of TuBishvat, among others, by students, and by the EU's commitment to planting 3 billion additional trees as part of the 2030 Biodiversity and Forestry Strategy, thereby expanding common awareness and visibility".

Thus, under the cloak of eco-friendly activities, there would be the participation of minors of another religions in spiritual and cultural judaic practices, i.e. participation in the “spring festival Tu bi-Swat (new year of trees) – a judaic vacation connected with nature conservation, during which trees are planted”.

At this point, it is appropriate to ask the question: whether obliging students to participate in specified practices violates Article 53 of the Polish Constitution, guaranteeing freedom of conscience and religion, prohibiting the exercise of spiritual practices, and parents giving inalienable rights to supply children with education and moral and spiritual teaching according to their beliefs.

Another issue addressed in the EU strategy is no little important, although it concerns the material aspect alternatively than the moral aspect. The section on the protection of judaic heritage points to the request to defend the "orphaned heritage", i.e. buildings, cemeteries and another judaic heritage sites which have been left unattended as a consequence of the Holocaust and are not presently used.

It besides pointed out that: "The Council of Europe Framework Convention on the importance of cultural heritage to society highlights crucial aspects of cultural heritage related to human rights and democracy and promotes a broader knowing of heritage and its links with communities and society." In this regard, judaic cultural heritage would not only be property and movable property belonging to judaic communities, but besides property belonging to the judaic community as such.

In adopting specified an explanation of judaic heritage, it was pointed out that "The Therezin Declaration on the property of the Holocaust period and the related issues, signed by all associate States in 2009, sets out a number of remedies for the victims of Nazi persecution and their descendants". Further to the strategy, "Member States are encouraged, among others, to implement the 2009 Terezian Declaration".

Thus, the European Commission has made a smooth transition from protecting judaic cemeteries and spiritual buildings against demolition and to taking action to "reparable justice against victims of Nazi persecution and their descendants", which consequently boils down to the adoption of any form of compensation for any property belonging to Jews resident in the territories of the EU associate States.

With respect to the Terezian Declaration, the EU's strategy goes even further and beyond correcting the harm caused to the victims of the “Nazi” persecution, the strategy points to the request for “reparable justice” besides for the descendants of direct victims of persecution, and the implementation of the “reparable justice” process will never end.

For the record, the Terezin Declaration was signed on 30 June 2009. On behalf of Poland, this declaration was signed by “Professor” Władysław Bartoszewski. Although the text of the declaration highlights "the legally non-binding nature of this Declaration and its moral responsibility", it must be recognised that, in the light of the strategy adopted by the European Union and the non-binding nature of the Terezian Declaration, it has evolved and is now beginning to influence the reality around us and political decisions taken.

Thus, it becomes real to comply with the most materially and economically crucial provisions of this declaration, i.e. “to deal with private claims of Holocaust victims (Shoah) concerning the property of erstwhile owners, heirs or their successors, either by way of either in-rem restitution or compensation, as appropriate, in a fair, comprehensive and non-discriminatory manner, in accordance with national law and applicable regulations as well as global agreements.

The process of specified restitution or compensation should be rapid, simple, accessible, transparent and neither burdensome nor costly to the claimant.’

The declaration besides stresses that "the knowing of human rights is essential in opposing and preventing all forms of racial, spiritual and cultural discrimination, including anti-Semitism and anti-Roman sentiments, present we are committed to including education on human rights in our educational systems' programmes". With respect to the financing of the above education, it was pointed out that "states may consider utilizing a number of additional support measures for specified education, including the use, where appropriate, of assets that have no heirs."

As it follows from the above, the full implementation of the EU strategy in the case of Poland may first be related to the designation of the existence of an institution that is unknown in the Polish legal order of the "undecided change" which would appear at the time of leaving the inheritance without heirs, whether testamentary or statutory. As has already been pointed out many times in the past, there is no specified institution in Poland and never existed.

In the absence of heirs, the inheritance was taken over by the Treasury, and so even in the case of the tragic death of the heir and his full family, each inheritance yet had its heir in the form of the Treasury.

The text of the resolution on the adoption of a national anti-Semitism strategy and support of judaic life for the period 2025–2030 does not straight indicate the fulfilment of the "moral responsibility" pursued by "handling private claims of Holocaust victims (Shoah) concerning the property of erstwhile owners, heirs or their successors, either by way of either restitution in rem or compensation".

However, taking into account the provisions of the EU education strategy, i.e. "the usage of a number of additional support measures for specified education, including the use, where appropriate, of assets that have no heirs", and the actions planned under the Polish strategy, it should be recognised that implementation of the provisions of the Terezian Declaration is likely to take place indirectly, i.e. through the transfer of immense funds from the state budget to entities who will participate in the implementation of this strategy.

Thus, the Terezinski Declaration will enter the phase of implementation in an indirect and complete silence, which frequently accompanies major transfers of funds.

Given the assumptions of the Polish strategy, it is besides expected that the transfer of funds will be carried out in a "fast, simple, accessible, transparent and neither burdensome, nor costly for the individual claiming", which in Polish realities should be understood as a procedure that excludes the request for formalised legal proceedings. Significantly, in the declaration, the word “Germany” never falls in the context of perpetrators and who are confined to stateless Nazis.

Definition of anti-Semitism

Another issue that needs to be established is the answer to the question of how to specify anti-Semitism, which is the subject of the Polish strategy. The answer to this question can be found in the proposal to accomplish the nonsubjective of the first strategy, i.e. to build awareness of the specificity of the phenomenon of anti-Semitism and its dangers. As part of the assumptions adopted, educational actions are planned for politicians, officials and another categories of public sector workers.

These actions focus on "promoting the definition of IHRA as a tool to combat anti-Semitism". The wording of the resolution did not indicate how this definition should be understood and what the IHRA is. The wording of the resolution besides did not indicate whether the adopted definition was formally valid in the Polish legal order or not.

To answer these questions, we request to go back to 2016, erstwhile the global Holocaust Remembrane Alliance (IHRA) developed a working definition of anti-Semitism. According to this definition, anti-Semitism is: “The definite perception of Jews, which can be expressed as hatred of them. Anti-Semitism manifests itself in both words and deeds directed against Jews or non-Jews and their property, as well as against the institutions and spiritual objects of the judaic community."

The phrases and phrases contained in the above definition are very general, and even devoid of any permanent and clearly defined meaning. The definition does not straight indicate what this "defined perception of Jews" is, by whom it is defined, and whether this perception is simply a certain definite constant, or whether this perception can change depending on the context of the event, the situation, the time in which it occurred, and the individual who would let it.

From the further part of the definition, this perception can be expressed as hatred of them. Looking logically at the phrase used, this anti-Semitism can besides be a closer indeterminate perception, which can express itself in any another way, not only as hatred, e.g. indifference or besides small enthusiasm towards this spiritual group.

The definition besides shows that anti-Semitism can be directed against anyone, i.e. against Jews and non-Jews.

The definition besides includes an open catalogue of activities that may be considered anti-Semitism. The analysis of the definition in this respect leads to the conclusion that this definition shifts the emphasis on activities involving the State of Israel, i.e. "the manifestations of anti-Semitism may include attacks on the State of Israel seen as a judaic collective". It was besides stated that "the anti-Semitic criticism of Israel akin to that directed at any another country" could not be considered

Nevertheless, the line outlined is so vague that it is not known at what point the criticism of Israel would be considered lawful and not permitted.

Among the actions carried out in Israel are:
– accusing Jews as a nation or Israel as a state of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust;
– accusing judaic citizens of being more loyal to the State of Israel or to alleged global judaic interests than to their country;
– to deprive Jews of their right to self-determination, for example by expressing the view that the existence of the State of Israel is simply a racist undertaking;
– applying double measurement by requiring Israel to behave which is not expected or not required of any another democratic state;
– comparing Israel's modern policy with that of the Nazis;
– burdening Jews as a general work for the actions of the State of Israel.

With specified a view of contemporary anti-Semitism manifestations in accordance with the proposed definition of anti-Semitism, the position of judaic communities, which have long advocated that anti-Zionism be regarded as modern anti-Semitism. At the same time, this "non-legally working definition of anti-Semitism" in the case of the adoption of the Polish anti-Semitism strategy will be introduced in the Polish legal order and will be utilized as an effective "tool to combat anti-Semitism", including in the field of criminal law.

Poland without anti-Semitism-motivated crimes

At this point we scope another point of strategy, which is simply a kind of utopia, which the Polish state will aim to achieve, i.e. Poland without anti-Semitism-motivated crimes.

The first look at the main objective, i.e. the complete elimination of anti-Semitism-driven crimes, and measures to accomplish this objective, i.e. the carrying out of information actions on procedures accompanying the reporting of specified crimes and the expanding number of criminal proceedings concerning anti-Semitic offences, indicates that the real nonsubjective is to make the problem of anti-Semitism- motivated crimes and then to fight these artificially created crimes.

The strategy besides cites the appropriateness of applying the ‘Guidelines to the lawyer General on Prejudice-motivated Crime Procedures’, in peculiar as regards ‘legitizations for notification of Articles 256, 257 or 119 of the KK and the appropriate qualification of certain acts’.

Given that law enforcement authorities and courts are to be subject to extended educational and training action in relation to the "legally-binding definition of anti-Semitism" mentioned above, it is expected that this definition, although formally not part of the national legal order, will be widely applied in proceedings both at the phase of the formulation of charges and the drafting of indictments and judgment.

The process decisions will besides be influenced by the fact that “the courts will get expertise from competent experts specialising in this subject”, with the competent experts no uncertainty only the expert who, in his opinions and actions, will contribute to the implementation of the national anti-Semitism strategy.

These changes to prosecution and judgement will not require any change to the law which is mostly applicable, but will be made through a change in practice of application and a change in its explanation based on a working definition of anti-Semitism. While the strategy foresees possible changes to the rules to adapt them, the changes will not be essential to make Poland a place "without anti-Semitism-motivated crimes".

Media, Internet, education, strengthening the memory of Holocaust and Polish Jews

Further areas of activity within the Polish strategy concern, among others, the media and the internet, education and strengthening the memory of the Holocaust and Polish Jews. These areas focus on anti-Semitism and the Holocaust. In these areas, extended information, education, investigation and control activities are envisaged for the transmission of traditional, online and online media and training platforms.

In addition, in the field of education, it pointed out the request to make "guidelines for teaching on anti-Semitism and the Holocaust, which will be implemented as part of the programme base changes".

The representatives of judaic social organizations, active in the field of memory policy and historical investigation on judaic heritage and Holocaust research, are besides to be active in the process of deciding about cultural institutions and memorial sites concerning the judaic community, which will enable these communities to exert decisive influence on the form of historical transmission and marginalisation or even exclusion of martyrdom of the Polish people during the war.

Some information on what will yet be the direction of investigation and education activities, is provided by the Polish strategy “a warrant of technological independency for those dealing with Polish-Jewish relations, historians etc. organization protection against SLAPP processes for investigation in this area, provided by employers (public universities, institutes of the Polish Academy of Sciences)’.

The resolution does not explain why the strategy foresees the request to grant additional “guarantee of technological independence” to researchers of Polish-Jewish relations, nor does it explain to the uninitiated what “SLAPP processes” are.

The Polish translation of SLAPP means strategical actions against public participation, i.e. trials against circumstantial people speaking on publically crucial topics, in this case Polish-Jewish relations researchers, in order to intimidate and silence them in connection with the request to bear the costs of lengthy legal proceedings.

Taking into account the objectives of the strategy and its impact on the implementation of judaic environments, it should be considered that the strategy's authors anticipate that the way in which the strategy in the field of investigation is implemented can lead to public dissatisfaction in Poland and the mobilisation of patriotic environments, resulting in the initiation of civilian proceedings against Polish-Jewish investigation researchers or possibly the submission of notices to the prosecutors in connection with the publications of these researchers.

Thus, the prevention of the authors of the strategy in the aforementioned subject indicates that the direction of technological research, followed by educational activities, will aim to shift the accents of identifying Poles as victims of planet War II towards the evolving ones, besides that "Poles did not do adequate to save Jews", "Poles were passive to the extermination of Jews", "Poles helped Nazis in the extermination of Jews", and yet that "Poles did not accomplish the extermination of Jews".

At all stages of the strategy, close cooperation with representatives of the judaic number in Poland and NGOs dealing with the problem of anti-Semitism, judaic organizations, including in peculiar judaic spiritual communities, experts on anti-Semitism, and, in the case of criminal proceedings, “competent experts specialising in this subject of experts”.

At the same time, the strategy provides for adequate backing in the form of grants, financing paths, various forms of support for NGOs and "encouraging partnerships between judaic municipalities (including the EGM and the FODŻ), which own judaic cemeteries, and local governments to share the duties and costs of maintaining the cemetery site".

The draft resolution does not specify the costs of implementing and implementing the strategy. In view of the scope of the planned activities, their complexity, the number of entities active on the side of both public administration bodies, local governments and judaic and non-governmental organisations, it should be considered that these costs will be crucial and that their final amount will be straight affected by the judaic environment.

As indicated above, the adopted scale of action and the consequent request to guarantee adequate financing entitles us to claim that Poland will fulfil the "non-legally binding" Terezinski Declaration with all its consequences.

Moreover, comparing the Terezin Declaration with the provisions contained in the EU and national strategy shows that we are dealing with the implementation of a long-term strategy of judaic communities aimed at forcing Poland to implement the demands of these communities in the field of shaping historical transmission, including changing the function of Poles from victims to executioners, penalising criticisms of judaic activities and supporting Israel, and yet forcing Poland to pay illegal claims for alleged "fallible property".

For the full assessment of the strategy and its impact, it should besides be noted that the strategy's authors operate only with concepts, with complete disregard for the fact that a major event, i.e. planet War II, took place during the period during which the Holocaust and the Holocaust were to take place. The adoption of specified a position is full in line with the judaic perspective, according to which planet War II is simply a completely negligible event compared to

to the most tragic event in history, i.e. the Holocaust. Therefore, it becomes apparent that only 1 group can be the victim, and another nations can only have the conferred function of passive observer, co-author or chief contractor, which is the function provided for Poles.

Summary and conclusion

In concluding the reflections on the assumptions of the national anti-Semitism strategy, it should be considered that as a consequence of its adoption and implementation, on the 1 hand, there will be an unprecedented strategy of favouring Jews and judaic communities, and on the another hand systemic discrimination against Poles.

As indicated above, the judaic communities will be given applicable opportunities to impose their historical communicative while obtaining mechanisms for systemic censorship of content presented in public and online media as well as on digital platforms, and will be subject to circumstantial legal protection both in terms of defending their interests and in terms of attacking critical environments against their demands.

Thus, even without any legal changes, and only the practice of applying the law, there will be a breach of Article 32 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, according to which all are equal to the law, all have the right to equal treatment by public authorities and that no 1 can be discriminated against in political life.

An analysis of the strategy's assumptions entitles to the claim that in modern realities there will be a realization of the Orwellian imagination presented in the Animal Farm, i.e. that: "All animals are equal but any are equal". The fact that unlike in the slanderous comic book “Maus” against Poland and Poles, this time the Jews will play the function of orwellish pigs is simply a small consolation.

Written by: Magna Polonia Legal Team

We besides recommend: EU coal work favours China at the expense of European industry