gh not acting intentionally. Hereupon, the case was taken to the Supreme Court. The latter’s October 29, 2012 resolution did however not resolve the interpretative dilemma and, after having been taken to the Regional Court in Gdansk (February 11, 2014), the Darski case is now final.
A subsequent issue is religious education. In Poland, religious and ethics courses are optional, whereby the choice depends on parents or pupils, but also on pupil numbers. At present some 24 religious denominations organise religious education in public schools. Issues related to religious education have also occasionally been taken to court. The most significant episode in this context is the action launched by Mateusz Grzelak, who filed a case before the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) following the absence, throughout the entire period of his schooling, of marks on religion/ethics in school reports. On June 15, 2010 the ECHR judged that this “amounted to a form of unwarranted stigmatisation”, in violation of Art. 14 of the Convention, in conjunction with Art. 9 (§ 101). The ECHR also observed that the provisions concerning religious and ethics courses in the Polish educational system were illusory and ineffective (§ 91). As a consequence, and as of September 1, 2014, the minimal number of pupils required to organize ethics courses has been reduced.
Animal rights have also been at the centre of Polish public debate, leading to a series of court procedures, notably regarding the practice of ritual slaughter. In its December 10, 2014 judgment, the Constitutional Tribunal stated that Art. 34 § 1 of the Act of August 21, 1997 on the protection of animals is inconsistent with Art. 53 § 1, 2 and 5 of the Constitution in connection with Art. 9 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as it does not allow the subjecting of animals to slaughter in accordance with special methods prescribed by religious rites. The same also counts for Art. 35 § 1 and 4 of the Act, which considers subjecting animals to this kind of slaughter a criminal offence. The Tribunal judged that freedom of religion, and especially the right to manifest religion, encompasses the right of religious organizations to practice ritual slaughter.
The absolute prohibition of such practices is thus seen as an unfounded restriction of freedom of religion. Since this judgment was made public (December 12, 2014), the contested provisions of the Act on animal protection are no longer in force. At present, ritual slaughter is regulated by European Council Regulation No. 1099/2009 of September 24, 2009 on the protection of animals at the time of killing: Art. 4 § 4 of the Regulation states that stunning is not obligatory when animals subject to particular methods of slaughter prescribed by religious rites are concerned, provided that slaughter takes place in a slaughterhouse.
As in many other EU countries, Poland has also witnessed public debate on conscientious objection, notably regarding abortion. The most recent case (2014) is that of public hospital professor, Bogdan Chazan, who refused to perform an abortion and was consequently dismissed from his functions. Not surprisingly, the Bureau of the Polish Bishops’ Conference expressed support for Chazan, stating that “conscientious objection must be protected not only from legal penalties but also from any negative legal consequences, disciplinary, financial and professional”. The National Council of Medical Professions has asked the Constitutional Tribunal to examine the constitutionality of the provisions included in article 39 of the Act on Medical and Dental Professions of December 5, 1996. The Tribunal’s decision is pending.
A final and related controversial issue is in vitro fertilization (IVF). Under pressure from the European Commission, Poland’s coalition government, led by the centre-right Civic Platform, has for several years, and so far unsuccessfully, been trying to pass IVF legislation. Once again the Bureau of the Polish Bishops’ Conference clearly expressed its opinion in the debat