Want to have an extra-marital affair and keep it a secret from your spouse? Thinking about offloading toxic waste in Africa and would like to avoid the publicity? You’ve come to the right place – read on.
We’re aware that many of our readers have secrets, after all, people who call themselves things like gopher, island1, tee, guest, Outsider, Decoy, odrzut and so on are hardly inviting the spotlight into their private lives, are they. Until now, keeping these secrets safe was only possible if you were a celebrity or football player and could afford the 250-750,000 PLN cost of a “super-injunction” but the team at Polandian think this runs contrary to various basic human rights, certainly within the EU, and so we’ve launched our brand new range of “Polandi-junctions”. Available to all our readers and indeed anyone else who’s interested they come in a flexible range of options to suit your needs and finances:
- Buy One Get One Free offers for footballers, politicians and celebrities.
- Group discounts available
- Lower rates for the under 12’s and the over 65’s.
This ground-shifting initiative brings the peace of mind of the super-injunction within the reach of normal people and for a very affordable outlay will give you the freedom to to get out there and be as bad as you like without the worry of consequences! Surely a giant leap for social justice.
As the idea of super-injunctions has not yet caught on in Poland (or perhaps they have but we don’t know about it because they are being upheld) there’s a handy guide – HERE or HERE. Essentially they are a turbo-charged version of what used to be called gagging orders, which prevent certain information being published and also prevent anyone from saying that there is a super-injunction in place – although I’m struggling with how that last part works.
Outside of Poland they are big news. Tune in to Sky News right now for example (not that you can!) and you’ll hear all about the happily (not for long) married Premier League footballer who’s super-injunction has annoyed the hell out of a former Big Brother contestant with whom he is supposed to have had a 6 month affair. The super-injunction he has put in place prevents her from revealing who he is although this hasn’t stopped her getting herself back into the warm glow of media attention she was no doubt missing after her time in the Big Brother house. Also hasn’t stopped the accusations that she was trying to blackmail him.
What makes the whole idea of super-injunctions just a little bit silly is that if you search on Twitter for about 3 nanoseconds you’ll find out exactly who the footballer is, or at least who thousands of Twits think he is – and you have to assume the Twits are right. Therein lies the problem and the reason for the wall-to-wall news coverage, these pesky social networking sites are preventing a lot of very nice lawyers from getting as rich as they’d like to be and will soon put an end to a very lucrative line of business. The unfolding story goes that the afore-not-mentioned footballer will be suing Twitter for releasing this information and he’s not the first case of a clash between UK super-injunction lawyers and US social networking corporations. An attempt to deal with this means that more recent injunctions include specific reference to as many possible leakage points as they can – from here:
Last week also saw the first injunction specifically targeting new media. In the case of a woman who wants to withdraw life support from her brain-damaged daughter, a court ordered that details of the matter not be discussed in “any newspaper, magazine, public computer network, internet site, social network or media including Twitter or Facebook, sound or television broadcast or cable or satellite programme service.”
Yesterday it was revealed that Twitter was named in a lawsuit filed at the High Court in London to enforce a super-injunction. The case is listed as CTB v. Twitter, Inc., and Persons Unknown — the anonymous tweeters. According to Bloomberg, “CTB are the initials used by the court in a separate lawsuit to refer to an athlete who won an anonymity order banning the media from publishing stories about his alleged affair with a reality-television star.”
The question everyone’s now asking is, can super-injunctions really be enforced against companies based in the U.S., where the Supreme Court has roundly rejected prior restraint.
It remains to be seen where all this mess will end up. Personally, I think they, like the rest of us, should think about the consequences before they do whatever they do and if they get caught they should be man/woman-enough to deal with the outcome but money and fame do strange things to people.
In Poland we shall have to see if these things take off, although according to this report, Poles are under more surveillance than any other country in the European Union so I can’t see the authorities here agreeing to anything that might make your private life less accessible to them!