Freedom of Expression of Judges and the Influence of Social Media

The jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and its recent decision (Żurek v Poland, application no. 39650/19), continues to shape standards for judges’ freedom of expression, including standards to protect judges who speak out against detrimental judicial reforms and use of social networks by judges. As new cases emerge and soft law instruments are developed, the topic remains highly relevant and will continue to pose challenges for judges in the years to come. Judges in some EU members States face unprecedented challenges to the rule of law, as evidenced by judicial reforms in countries like Poland and Hungary. The erosion of judicial independence and impartiality in this context underscores the importance of judges’ freedom of expression as a safeguard against threats to the rule of law. Raising awareness on this issue should equip judges with legal knowledge and procedural safeguards necessary to navigate the complexities of their professional roles while upholding fundamental principles of judicial independence and integrity. Furthermore, social networks have revolutionised communication in modern society, including judges. While use of social media by judges can enhance transparency and public engagement, it also raises concerns about the appropriateness of their communication, especially regarding impartiality. Judges must navigate the blurred lines between their private and public personas on social media platforms, as their actions and interaction can have implications for their perceived impartiality and judicial integrity. While there are articles devoted to the analysis of the judges’ freedom of expression in constitutional crises in this paper authors are providing a comparative analysis of social media usage guidelines for judges and jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights to identify a proper balance between exercising the freedom of expression by judges and the limitations posed by interest of judicial independence, impartiality and public trust in judiciary and specific issues relate to the use of social networks.