“Judges' presence on social media in times of constitutional breakdown in Poland – from the mouthpiece of legislature to the spokesmen of judiciary”

Since the United Right took over the government in Poland in 2015, there has been a noticeable trend to limit the independence and impartiality of the courts. The retreat from liberal democracy observed and described by academics has also been reflected in social media. Previously absent from this space, judges have begun to speak out on systemic, often political issues on digital platforms - especially Facebook and Twitter. On the one hand, judges speaking out on social media can be seen as an important step in bridging the gap between the judiciary and the public and as an element of civic education. On the other hand, it opens up the possibility of new accusations being formulated against judges, especially regarding the political nature of the statements or the violation of the injunction of restraint of speech in media of any kind. The article will first present the normative framework for the presence of judges in social media, based on international provisions, national legislation, and soft law - in this case, recommendations from non-governmental organisations (such as the CEELI Institute). This will be followed by examples of the most interesting contributions of judges operating in the digital space. The author will give voice to both judges who oppose changes in the legal system and those who support those currently in power. Specific examples will be used to discuss ways of expressing opinions (e.g., different from the language of verdicts and substantiation). This section also includes examples of online hate campaigns against judges (both those organised with the support of state media and those organised by individuals). The quoted statements by judges did not go unchallenged. They have been used by the media - both pro-government propaganda and opposition media, which will also be highlighted - as well as in disciplinary proceedings initiated by the relevant authorities. The final part of the article will present conclusions and recommendations concerning the participation of Polish judges in the public debate taking place in the virtual environment. The author will attempt to assess the impact of the change in the communication paradigm from the 'mouth of the law' to the 'mouth of the judiciary'. The voice of Polish judges has certainly been heard for some time. What remains to be seen is who will hear it, who will listen to it, and whether the listeners will understand it. It will also be important to see whether the voice of the judges will lead to an increase in the eroded trust in the judiciary or to a further decline.