For the third time, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ruled against Poland, insisting the country must establish legal recognition for same-sex couples. The latest case involved two Polish same-sex couples who were denied certificates necessary to marry abroad.
Poland’s civil registry office refused, citing national laws that define marriage strictly as a union between a man and a woman. After Polish courts upheld the decision, the couples turned to the ECHR, arguing it violated their right to private and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The ruling follows previous judgments—Przybyszewska (2023) and Formela (2024)—which similarly faulted Poland for failing to accommodate same-sex partnerships. The ECHR claims Poland has left such couples in a “legal vacuum,” depriving them of basic legal protections like inheritance rights, joint taxation, and medical decision-making.
However, the Ordo Iuris Institute, which intervened in the case, contends that the Convention does not mandate redefining family structures to include same-sex unions. It argues that each country should retain sovereignty in family law matters. Poland’s Constitution, which takes precedence over international rulings, explicitly protects marriage as a heterosexual institution.
While Poland is technically obligated to comply with the ECHR’s decision, legal experts debate what that actually entails. The ruling does not require legalizing same-sex marriage but suggests introducing either civil partnerships or other legal arrangements granting practical rights—such as medical access and inheritance benefits—to same-sex couples.
Patryk Ignaszczak of Ordo Iuris warns that such changes could conflict with Article 18 of Poland’s Constitution, which enshrines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. As the legal and political battle unfolds, Poland now faces mounting pressure from European institutions to redefine its stance on same-sex unions, despite strong constitutional barriers.
