This article needs to be updated. The reason given is: Rulings II OSK 2376/19, II OSK 2284/18 of the Supreme Administrative Court are not taken into account. Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (November 2022)
Gay couple (right) at the Queer May festival in Kraków in 2017
US: Neither performed nor recognized in some tribal nations. Recognized but not performed in several other tribal nations and American Samoa.
Israel: Registered foreign marriages confer all marriage rights. Domestic common-law marriages confer most rights of marriage. Domestic civil marriage recognized by some cities.
Poland does not legally recognize same-sex unions, either in the form of marriage or civil unions. In 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples have limited legal rights in regards to the tenancy of a shared household. A few laws also guarantee certain limited rights for unmarried couples, including couples of the same sex. Same-sex spouses also have access to residency rights under EU law.
While Poland does not have a specific law on cohabitation, there are some provisions in various legal acts or Supreme Court rulings that recognise relations between unmarried partners and grant them specific rights and obligations. For example, Article 115(11) of the Penal Code (Polish: Kodeks karny) uses the term "the closest person", which covers romantic relations that are not legally formalised. The status of "the closest person" gives the right of refusal to testify against the partner. The term "partner" is not explicitly defined. A March 2016 landmark decision of the Supreme Court regarding same-sex partners' rights confirmed that the wording also includes same-sex partners.[15]
Laws regarding same-sex partnerships in Europe¹
Marriage
Civil union
Limited domestic recognition (cohabitation)
Limited foreign recognition (residency rights)
Unrecognized
Constitution limits marriage to opposite-sex couples
¹ May include recent laws or court decisions that have not yet entered into effect.
Other laws also provide limited recognition for same-sex couples. For instance, since 2004, when one partner is entitled to social benefits, the income of the other partner is also taken into consideration. Under Article 6.14 of the Social Aid Act of 12 March 2004 (Polish: Ustawa z dnia 12 marca 2004 r. o pomocy społecznej), entitlement to social benefits is dependent on the income per person in a family. The term "family" is used in the act to refer to people who are married, in a de facto partnership, living together and have a common household. Since 2008, if one partner suffers an accident or is seriously ill, the other partner is considered as a next of kin for medical purposes. Under Article 3.1(2) of the Patients' Rights Act of 6 November 2008 (Polish: Ustawa z dnia 6 listopada 2008 r. o prawach pacjenta i Rzeczniku Praw Pacjenta), the definition of "next of kin" (Polish: osoba bliska) includes a "person in a durable partnership" (Polish: osoba w trwałym pożyciu).[16][17][18][19][20][21]
A resolution of the Supreme Court from 28 November 2012 (III CZP 65/12) on the interpretation of the term "a person who has lived actually in cohabitation with the tenant" was issued with regard to the case of a gay man who was the partner of a deceased person, the main tenant of the apartment. The Court interpreted the law in a way that recognised the surviving partner as authorised to take over the right to tenancy. The Court stated that the person actually remaining in cohabitation with the tenant - in the meaning of Article 691 § 1 of the Civil Code - is a person connected with the tenant by a bond of emotional, physical and economic nature. This also includes a person of the same sex.[22][23] Previously, in March 2010, the European Court of Human Rights ruled, in the case of Kozak v. Poland, that LGBT people have the right to inherit from their partners.[24]
In one case in 2011, a Polish writer, Izabela Filipiak, managed to get a residency card for her American partner.[25]
In 2018, a lesbian couple was granted the right to register their British-born son as their own.[26][27]
Historian Kamil Karczewski has unearthed evidence of what may be the earliest documented instance of a same-sex partnership resembling marital union in the legal history of Poland. The partnership involved Marian Kuleszyński and Stefan Góralski, both residents of the Suwałki region in the early 1920s. While the relationship lacked formal legal status and was kept confidential, the pair entered into a de facto agreement grounded in fidelity, an expectation of enduring commitment, and a 'friendship for life oath.' This oath comprised stipulations for mutual defense, support, and the safeguarding of the relationship's confidentiality. The case serves as a landmark discovery in the legal and cultural history of LGBTQ+ relationships in Poland, shedding light on the legal intricacies and social dynamics of same-sex partnerships during this period.[28]
Limited symbolic recognition
In 2004, the WarsawPublic Transport Authority's decision to allow cohabiting partners of gay and lesbian employees to travel free on the city's public transport system was the first case of recognition of same-sex couples in Poland. In 2007, a decision of Chorzów's City Center of Social Assistance recognized persons living in a common relationship in the same household as a family, for various purposes associated with the center.
At the end of 2010, a court in Złotów decided that the same-sex partner of a woman who had died was entitled to continue the lease on their communal apartment. The municipality appealed the verdict, but the District Court in Poznań rejected the appeal. Thus, the decision of the Złotów court became final. "The court found that these women actually remained in a stable partnership. Any other interpretation would lead to discrimination based on sexual orientation," said the president of the District Court in Złotów, Adam Jutrzenka-Trzebiatowski.[29]
On 5 June 2018, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that European Union member states (including Poland) must recognise the freedom of movement and residency rights of same-sex spouses, provided one partner is an EU citizen.[30][31][32] The Court ruled that EU member states may choose whether or not to allow same-sex marriage, but they cannot obstruct the freedom of residence of an EU citizen and their spouse. Furthermore, the Court ruled that the term "spouse" is gender-neutral, and that it does not necessarily imply a person of the opposite sex.[33][34]
Registered partnerships
Before 2005
The first legislative proposal to recognise unregistered cohabiting couples (including same-sex couples) was proposed in 2002, but did not advance.[35]
In 2004, under a left-wing government, the Senate approved a bill allowing gay and lesbian couples to register their relationships as civil unions. The civil unions proposed by the bill would have given couples a range of benefits, protections and responsibilities currently granted only to opposite-sex married couples, including pension funds, joint tax and death-related benefits, but did not grant the right to adopt children. The bill was passed with 38 votes in favour, 23 against and 15 abstentions. It lapsed due to the 2005 general election.[36]
A new registered partnership bill was proposed to the Government of Civic Platform and the Polish People's Party in late 2007, but was rejected. In 2008, a fourth bill on registered partnerships was prepared by the opposition SLD, but was never introduced to the Parliament due to its low chance of success.[38]
In June 2009, gay and lesbian organisations submitted a petition calling for registered partnerships to the Speaker of the Sejm, Bronisław Komorowski (PO).[39] By this point, some politicians from parties opposed to same-sex unions, including Jerzy Buzek (PO) and Michał Kamiński (PiS), had expressed support for certain rights being granted to same-sex couples.[40] Attitudes from some representatives of the church had also changed.[41] In January 2010, the opposition SLD, in consultation with LGBT organisations, prepared a new draft law on registered partnerships, modelled on the bill approved by the Senate in 2004 and similar to the French pacte civil de solidarité (PACS).[42] However, the bill had no chance of getting passed in Parliament as PO, PiS and PSL announced that they would not support it.[43][44][45][46]
On 17 May 2011, the SLD presented a draft law on registered partnerships, which would regulate the relationships of same-sex and opposite-sex unmarried couples, similar to the French PACS law.[47][48] Agnieszka Pomaska, Deputy Secretary-General of the Platforma Obywatelska, commented that it was time to discuss the legal regulation of informal relationships, both opposite-sex and same-sex and that PO was open to discussing registered partnerships.[47][49]Prime MinisterDonald Tusk (PO) announced that the law on registered partnerships would be passed at the beginning of the next term of the Sejm,[50] but Speaker of the Sejm Grzegorz Schetyna (PO) said that a vote would not be put to Parliament during that legislative term.[51] However, after receiving a petition in favour of the registered partnership bill signed by 23,500 people, Speaker Schetyna declared that he would probably submit the bill for its first reading in Parliament after 10 July 2011.[52] Krzysztof Tyszkiewicz, spokesman of the PO parliamentary group, announced that the party would support the SLD bill, but only after the parliamentary elections in October 2011.[53]
In July 2011, the Social and Family Policy Commission and the Justice and Human Rights Commission held a first reading of the registered partnership bill. Out of the 67 (32 PO, 23 PiS, 7 SLD, 2 PSL, 3 non-attached) members of the committees, 29 voted in favour, 10 voted against and 3 abstained.[54]
After the bill passed its first reading in the Sejm,[55] the Supreme Court of Poland expressed its opinion on 9 October 2011, before the elections. The Court undermined any further progress of the bill, highlighting numerous legal deficiencies. It also stated that the registration of cohabiting opposite-sex couples was incompatible with Article 18 of the Polish Constitution. Regarding the relationships of same-sex couples, it stated that the admissibility and scope of any statutory regulation required an analysis taking into account international legal obligations, and considering the implications of recent judgments by the European Court of Human Rights.[56] According to professor Miroslaw Wyrzykowski, head of the Department of Human Rights at the University of Warsaw's Faculty of Law, and a former judge of the Polish Constitutional Court, the Constitution requires the introduction of civil partnerships.[57] In the end, the bill was never voted upon by Parliament and therefore expired.
2011–2015
After the parliamentary elections of 9 October 2011, Janusz Palikot, the leader of the Palikot Movement (RP), declared that a bill on civil partnerships would be one of the first draft laws submitted to the new Parliament.[58]Leszek Miller, head of the SLD parliamentary grouping, announced that they would reintroduce the same bill as had been introduced in the previous parliaments.[59]Rafał Grupiński, vice president of the PO parliamentary grouping, announced that its members would have a free vote on the draft law. Stanisław Żelichowski, head of the PSL parliamentary grouping, said that he expected the SLD's bill to be mostly ignored by Parliament.[60]
A new draft law based on the one adopted by the Senate in 2004 (similar to the Scandinavian model, not the French PACS), applying to same-sex couples only, would be prepared and submitted to Parliament in early December 2011, as a joint initiative of the SLD and the RP. Some members of the PO also declared their support. PSL did not state a firm position on the issue but was believed to be in support. Only PiS were opposed, though some of its members, such as Witold Waszczykowski, signalled their support.[61][62][63]
Polish MEP Agnieszka Kozłowska-Rajewicz described the adoption of the law on civil partnerships as one of her priorities, though she added that the ideal would be the introduction of same-sex marriage.[64] She also said that civil partnerships similar to the French PACS were the form of unions over which there was agreement at the time and that the law would be enacted in that parliamentary term.[65] Separately, a government report, entitled Poland 2030 Third wave of modernity – Long-term National Development Strategy, stated that an objective for the five-year period to 2015 should be the equalization of rights for stable unmarried couples.[66] Arthur Dunin (PO) commented that many PO parliamentarians saw the need for such a partnership law, provided that it did not go too far. Such a law, which would enable the legal recognition of both same-sex and opposite-sex couples, would be similar to the French PACS, and would also have the support of conservative members of the PO.[67]
On 13 January 2012, the SLD and RP jointly presented two draft laws on civil partnerships to the Sejm. The first bill was the same that had failed in the previous Sejm, similar to the French PACS law (for same-sex and opposite-sex couples), whereas the second bill was similar to the Scandinavian model (for same-sex couples only). The PO intended to introduce its own bill, similar to the French PACS law but including some differences between civil unions and marriages, as required for consistency with the Constitution.[68][69][70][71][72][73] On 28 June, the Legislative Committee expressed the opinion that both bills were unconstitutional. On 24 July, the Polish Sejm voted against the submission for a first reading on the two bills. One day later, the Civic Platform (PO) proposed its own bill on "civil partnership agreements", which was submitted to the Parliament in September.[74]
All three drafts were rejected on 25 January 2013 by the plenary session of the Sejm, with the most narrow defeat being for the bill proposed by Civic Platform, which lost by 211–228.[75]
2015–present
Following the 2015 parliamentary elections, the socially conservative PiS, which is opposed to registered partnerships, formed the new Government.
A new registered partnership bill was proposed on 12 February 2018 by the Modern party.[76][77][78] It was introduced to the Sejm in April 2018.[79]
European Court of Human Rights cases
In July 2020, the European Court of Human Rights notified the Polish government of cases filed by Polish same-sex couples, inviting the Polish government to present its position on the issue (Andersen v. Poland[80]). Based on the precedents of Oliari and Others v Italy, in which the court found that "the absence of a legal framework allowing for recognition and protection of [applicants] relationship violates their rights under Article 8 of the Convention", and Orlandi and Others v. Italy, in which the ECtHR ruled that Italy must recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions, advocates hope that the cases will lead to legal recognition of same-sex relationships in Poland. If a friendly settlement is not reached, the cases will take months or years to go to trial.[81][82][83][84]
In a judgment issued on 12 December 2023 in the case of Przybyszewska and Others v. Poland (applications nos. 11454/17 and 9 others), the European Court of Human Rights ruled that by failing to legalise same-sex unions, Poland had violated the right to respect for private and family life (Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights).[85]
Poland has an obligation to implement this judgment and legalise same-sex unions without delay.[citation needed] On 27 December 2023, Poland's new Prime Minister, Donald Tusk, announced that a bill to legalise same-sex unions would be introduced and debated in the Sejm in early 2024.[86]
Małżeństwo jako związek kobiety i mężczyzny, rodzina, macierzyństwo i rodzicielstwo znajdują się pod ochroną i opieką Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej. English translation:[1] Marriage, as a union of a man and a woman, as well as the family, motherhood and parenthood, shall be placed under the protection and care of the Republic of Poland.
The article was adopted in 1997. The purpose of the article has been to ensure that legislators would not be able to legalize same-sex marriage without changing the Constitution.[8][9] Jurists have generally interpreted it as a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.[2][8][9][10][11][88][89][90] Several lawyers and jurists have argued that the article does not formally define marriage, and while promoting opposite-sex marriages, does not in itself ban same-sex marriage.[91][92]
The term "cohabitation" refers only to concubinage, and in particular to the relationship between persons of different sexes, corresponding to the actual status of marriage (which according to Article 18 of the Constitution, is solely a union between persons of different sexes).
The Polish Constitution specifies marriage as a union of exclusively of a woman and a man. Thus, a contrario, it does not allow same-sex relationships. [...] Marriage (as a union of a woman and a man) has obtained a separate constitutional status within the domestic law of the Republic of Poland, on the basis of Article 18 of the Constitution. Any change of this status would be possible only by the way of an amendment to the Constitution, according to Article 235 thereof.)
On 9 November 2010, the Constitutional Tribunal held that:[5]
The doctrine of constitutional law also indicates that the only normative element that can be decoded from Article 18 of the Constitution is the principle of heterosexuality of marriage.
The Act on Publicly Funded Healthcare Benefits does not explain, however, who is a spouse. But this concept is sufficiently and clearly defined in the aforementioned Article 18 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, which refers to marriage as a union between a woman and a man. The literature emphasizes that Article 18 of the Constitution establishes the principle of heterosexuality of marriage, [...] which prohibits lawmakers from statutory granting the status of marriage to relationships between persons of the same sex. Therefore, it is obvious that marriage in the light of the Constitution, and hence, in the light of Polish law, can only be, and is only a heterosexual union, and thus same-sex individuals cannot be spouses in a marriage.
In 2018, ruling on the recognition of foreign same-sex marriages, the Supreme Administrative Court of Poland ruled that "Article 18 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, which defines marriage as a union of a man and a woman, [...] requires to treat only a heterosexual union as a marriage in Poland".[7] Specifically, the court ruled that registering same-sex marriages performed outside of Poland would breach the Constitution and the Private International Law Act (Polish: Ustawa z dnia 4 lutego 2011 r. Prawo prywatne międzynarodowe).
Seeking to test the legal wording, a same-sex couple, vloggers Jakub and Dawid, applied to have their Portuguese marriage recognised. Their application was rejected by the Civil Registry in Warsaw, but they appealed to a Voivode. After their case was rejected by the Voivode, they filed suit. On 8 January 2019, the Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Warszawie, the administrative court for the Masovian Voivodeship, ruled that their marriage could not be recognised under Polish law. However, it did rule that should the Family Code and other statutes provide for the institution of same-sex marriage than article 18 would not provide a direct obstacle.[12] The Campaign Against Homophobia praised the ruling,[93] while the Ministry of Justice questioned the court's legal authority.[94][95] The couple sought legal advice on whether to appeal certain parts of the ruling, namely those pertaining to the refusal to recognise their marriage.[12]
Recent polls have found conflicting numbers in relation to same-sex registered partnerships, with some pollsters finding majorities against, but others finding majorities in support. In general, however, a trend in favor of registered partnerships and LGBTQ rights has been observed over the years. [97][98]
The 2015 Eurobarometer found that 28% of Poles thought that same-sex marriage should be allowed throughout Europe, 61% were against.[99] This was an 11% increase from the previous Eurobarometer, which was conducted in 2006. Additionally, the number of those who "strongly opposed" same-sex marriage almost halved from 2006 to 2015. The 2019 Eurobarometer found a large increase in support, with 45% of Poles in support of same-sex marriage, and 50% opposed. This increase of 17% was the second-highest in the European Union, after Germany at 18%. Of countries forming the former Eastern Bloc (excluding East Germany), Poland ranked second in support for same-sex marriage, after the Czech Republic.
A GLOBSEC survey conducted in March 2023 showed that 54% of Poles supported same-sex marriage, while 38% were opposed. This was the first time ever a poll had found majority support for same-sex marriage in Poland.[100]
The 2023 Eurobarometer found that 50% of Poles agreed that same-sex marriage should be legalized throughout Europe (up from 45% in 2019) while 45% disagreed. This is the first time a majority of Poles support same-sex marriage in an Eurobarometer, showing a steady increase in support for LGBT rights.[101]
Views on homosexuality
In September 2021, the percentage of respondents who personally know someone LGBT reached a record 43%. Respondents were also asked whether they agreed that:
homosexuality is not normal and must not be tolerated (17%)
homosexuality is a deviation from the norm, but it should be tolerated (51%)
homosexuality is normal (23%)
Hard to say (9%)
In total, 74% of Poles tolerate homosexuality, while 17% do not.[102]
CBOS polls
Support for the recognition of same-sex relationships
The 2013 poll found that support for same-sex registered partnerships varied significantly by political parties. 68% of Your Movement (formerly RP) voters supported registered partnerships, 56% of SLD voters, 50% of PO voters, 24% of PSL voters and 15% of PiS voters.
Support for registered partnerships is higher among young people, people who have a higher education, who live in big cities, who have a higher income, who are less religious and who are politically left-wing.
^ abJudgment of the Supreme Court of 7 July 2004, II KK 176/04, W dotychczasowym orzecznictwie Sądu Najwyższego, wypracowanym i ugruntowanym zarówno w okresie obowiązywania poprzedniego, jak i obecnego Kodeksu postępowania karnego, a także w doktrynie (por. wypowiedzi W. Woltera, A. Zolla, A. Wąska), pojęcie "wspólne pożycie" odnoszone jest wyłącznie do konkubinatu, a w szczególności do związku osób o różnej płci, odpowiadającego od strony faktycznej stosunkowi małżeństwa (którym w myśl art. 18 Konstytucji jest wyłącznie związek osób różnej płci). Tego rodzaju interpretację Sąd Najwyższy, orzekający w niniejszej sprawie, w pełni podziela i nie znajduje podstaw do uznania za przekonywujące tych wypowiedzi pojawiających się w piśmiennictwie, w których podejmowane są próby kwestionowania takiej interpretacji omawianego pojęcia i sprowadzania go wyłącznie do konkubinatu (M. Płachta, K. Łojewski, A.M. Liberkowski). Rozumiejąc bowiem dążenia do rozszerzającej interpretacji pojęcia "wspólne pożycie", użytego w art. 115 § 11 k.k., należy jednak wskazać na całkowity brak w tym względzie dostatecznie precyzyjnych kryteriów.
^ ab"Judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal of 11 May 2005, K 18/04". 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.
^ ab"Judgment of the Supreme Administrative Court of Poland of 25 October 2016, II GSK 866/15". 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.
^ abcGallo D, Paladini L, Pustorino P, eds. (2014). Same-Sex Couples before National, Supranational and International Jurisdictions. Berlin: Springer. p. 215. ISBN9783642354342. the drafters of the 1997 Polish Constitution included a legal definition of a marriage as the union of a woman and a man in the text of the constitution in order to ensure that the introduction of same-sex marriage would not be passed without a constitutional amendment.
^ abcMarek Safjan; Leszek Bosek, eds. (2016). Konstytucja RP. Tom I. Komentarz do art. 1-86. Warszawa: C.H. Beck Wydawnictwo Polska. ISBN9788325573652. Z przeprowadzonej powyżej analizy prac nad Konstytucją RP wynika jednoznacznie, że zamieszczenie w art. 18 Konstytucji RP zwrotu definicyjnego "związek kobiety i mężczyzny" stanowiło reakcję na fakt pojawienia się w państwach obcych regulacji poddającej związki osób tej samej płci regulacji zbliżonej lub zbieżnej z instytucją małżeństwa. Uzupełniony tym zwrotem przepis konstytucyjny "miał pełnić rolę instrumentu zapobiegającego wprowadzeniu takiej regulacji do prawa polskiego" (A. Mączyński, Konstytucyjne podstawy prawa rodzinnego, s. 772). Innego motywu jego wprowadzenia do Konstytucji RP nie da się wskazać (szeroko w tym zakresie B. Banaszkiewicz, "Małżeństwo jako związek kobiety i mężczyzny", s. 640 i n.; zob. też Z. Strus, Znaczenie artykułu 18 Konstytucji, s. 236 i n.). Jak zauważa A. Mączyński istotą tej regulacji było normatywne przesądzenie nie tylko o niemożliwości unormowania w prawie polskim "małżeństw pomiędzy osobami tej samej płci", lecz również innych związków, które mimo tego, że nie zostałyby określone jako małżeństwo miałyby spełniać funkcje do niego podobną (A. Mączyński, Konstytucyjne podstawy prawa rodzinnego, s. 772; tenże, Konstytucyjne i międzynarodowe uwarunkowania, s. 91; podobnie L. Garlicki, Artykuł 18, w: Garlicki, Konstytucja, t. 3, uw. 4, s. 2, który zauważa, że w tym zakresie art. 18 nabiera "charakteru normy prawnej").
^ abScherpe JM, ed. (2016). European Family Law Volume III: Family Law in a European Perspective Family. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 121. ISBN9781785363047. Constitutional bans on same-sex marriage are now applicable in ten European countries: Article 32, Belarus Constitution; Article 46 Bulgarian Constitution; Article L Hungarian Constitution, Article 110, Latvian Constitution; Article 38.3 Lithuanian Constitution; Article 48 Moldovan Constitution; Article 71 Montenegrin Constitution; Article 18 Polish Constitution; Article 62 Serbian Constitution; and Article 51 Ukrainian Constitution.
^ abStewart J, Lloyd KC (2016). "Marriage Equality in Europe". Family Advocate. 38 (4): 37–40. Article 18 of the Polish Constitution limits the institution of marriage to opposite-sex couples.
LGBT portal
