- Business in Poland -
Public Accusations on Social Media – Legal Consequences of Online Hate
Online hate is a common term for a statement, comment, post, recording or graphic that targets another person or entity and exceeds the limits of permissible criticism. It may involve insulting someone, defaming them, accusing them of crimes, dishonesty, workplace bullying, fraud, violence or other conduct that undermines the trust required to carry out professional, business or public activities.
In business matters, accusations on social media are particularly risky. A single post can be preserved in screenshots, shared by multiple users, indexed by search engines and used in relations with clients, employees, contractors or authorities. The legal consequences depend on the content, context, reach of the publication, status of the injured party and whether the author presented facts or opinions.
Online hate legal consequences: civil, criminal and professional liability
A public accusation may infringe personal rights, in particular a good name, dignity, an entrepreneur's reputation, privacy or image. Claims may be based on Articles 23 and 24 of the Civil Code and, in certain cases, also Article 448 of the Civil Code [1]. A person affected by a post and, with regard to the protection of reputation, also an entrepreneur or legal person, may demand, among other things, removal of the content, an apology, cessation of further publications and, where statutory conditions are met, financial remedies such as compensation for non-material harm or an appropriate sum for a social cause.
Criminal law issues arise in particular in cases of defamation and insult. Defamation under Article 212 of the Criminal Code consists in alleging that a person, group of persons, institution, legal person or organisational unit without legal personality has acted or has characteristics that may humiliate them in public opinion or expose them to loss of trust necessary for a given position, profession or type of activity [2]. Insult under Article 216 of the Criminal Code concerns offensive, degrading or contemptuous statements [2].
The phrase penalty for online hate does not refer to a single sanction. Depending on the legal classification, the consequences may include a fine, restriction of liberty and, where mass communication channels are used, imprisonment for up to one year. The author may also face an obligation to apologise, a compensatory payment, compensation for non-material harm and, in certain situations, disciplinary or employment-related liability. A final assessment requires an analysis of the content and evidence.
When do public accusations on social media break the law?
The greatest risk arises when the author of a post presents as fact information that they cannot prove. Examples include statements that a specific person "stole money", "falsifies documents", "uses workplace bullying" or "runs a criminal business", if there is no final and binding judgment or no strong, verifiable basis for such a claim.
The form of the statement also matters. Even justified criticism may become unlawful if it contains insults, insinuations, manipulated quotations, disclosure of private data, baseless suggestions of criminal conduct or calls for harassment. In reputation-related matters, KKZ lawyers usually analyse not only a single post, but also the entire communication chain, comments, administrators' reactions and further shares. More information on reputation protection is available in the personal rights and media law practice.
Three exceptions: when a harsh statement may be legally permissible
Not every negative statement is online hate. The boundary between permissible criticism and a breach of the law depends on the circumstances. In practice, three situations are most often analysed:
- Fact-based, substantive criticism - a statement may be permissible if it concerns an important matter, refers to verifiable events and does not use a degrading form.
- A true allegation made to defend a socially justified interest - in defamation cases, Article 213 of the Criminal Code is important because it sets out the conditions for excluding criminal liability for an allegation [2].
- Notifying the competent authorities instead of public shaming - a person who suspects misconduct may refer the matter to law enforcement authorities, a court, an employer or the relevant regulator, while maintaining proportionality, confidentiality and good faith.
These situations do not apply automatically. They do not protect posts containing false information, insults, threats, sensitive data or publications aimed mainly at humiliating the other party.
What should you do after online hate or a public accusation is published?
The first step should be to secure evidence. The mere removal of a post by its author does not end the matter if the content has already been preserved. It is worth saving the link, date, time, profile name, screenshots, comments, number of reactions and information about further shares. In more serious cases, a notarial protocol or securing the material by a specialist may be useful.
The next step is to assess the appropriate course of action. Available measures may include:
- a demand to remove the post and publish an apology,
- reporting the violation to the platform administrator,
- an application for interim measures in civil proceedings,
- a lawsuit for the protection of personal rights,
- a private bill of indictment in a defamation or insult case,
- communication measures aimed at reducing reputational risk.
For companies, it is essential to quickly separate facts from opinions. A public response should be brief, consistent and aligned with the evidence. An emotional reaction often increases the reach of the dispute and makes later proceedings more difficult.
Risks for post authors, employees and managers
The author of a hateful post may be liable as an individual, regardless of whether they use a private, corporate or anonymous account. Online anonymity does not exclude liability. During proceedings, it may be possible to identify user data with the involvement of platforms, service providers or law enforcement authorities, within the limits of the relevant procedures.
For employees, an additional risk is the breach of employee duties, trade secrets, external communication rules or compliance policies. For management board members and public figures, the impact of a post on investor relations, tenders, audits and stakeholder trust is also significant.
A broader discussion of a similar issue is available in the analysis concerning public accusations on social media.
The importance of compliance procedures and social media policies
Organisations should treat online hate and public accusations as a component of legal and reputational risk. Helpful measures include misconduct reporting procedures, a social media communication policy, whistleblower protection rules, training for management staff and rapid crisis response mechanisms.
This material is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. In the case of publications that infringe a good name, a company's reputation or employee safety, it is advisable to commission an analysis of the content, evidence and possible claims. Support in this area is provided by Kopeć & Zaborowski law firm.
FAQ: Public Accusations on Social Media - Legal Consequences of Online Hate
Is online hate always a crime?
No. Online hate may give rise to civil, criminal, employment-related or disciplinary liability, but the legal classification depends on the content, context and consequences of the publication.
Can a true accusation be published without risk?
Not always. Even true information may infringe personal rights, privacy, trade secrets or the principle of proportionality. In criminal law, Article 213 of the Criminal Code is relevant, among other provisions.
What are the consequences of defamation on social media?
In the case of defamation under Article 212 of the Criminal Code, the possible sanctions include a fine or restriction of liberty. If the act is committed through mass communication channels, imprisonment for up to one year may also apply. The injured party may also pursue civil claims.
Can a company sue the author of a hateful post?
Yes. An entrepreneur may seek protection of its reputation and good name under the provisions on personal rights if the post damages its reputation.
Is it worth responding publicly to accusations?
A response may be necessary, but it should be cautious, factual and consistent with the evidence. An ill-considered reaction may increase the reach of the dispute.
How should evidence of online hate be secured?
You should preserve links, screenshots, dates, profile data, comments and shares. In serious cases, it is worth considering a notarial protocol.
Bibliography
- [1] Act of 23 April 1964 - Civil Code, in particular Articles 23, 24 and 448.
- [2] Act of 6 June 1997 - Criminal Code, in particular Articles 212, 213 and 216.
- [3] Act of 17 November 1964 - Code of Civil Procedure, in particular the provisions on interim measures securing claims.
- [4] Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market for Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC, Digital Services Act.
- [5] Act of 14 June 2024 on the Protection of Whistleblowers.
Author: adw. Maciej Zaborowski, Managing Partner
E-mail: m.zaborowski@kkz.com.pl
