Perjury in Poland: Consequences of Lying Under Oath

Perjury in Poland is commonly understood as giving false testimony or concealing the truth in proceedings where evidence is being collected. Under Polish law, the offence is not limited to a statement made after taking a formal oath or pledge. A witness may be criminally liable where they were properly warned about liability for false testimony, even if no oath or pledge was administered.

The relevant offence is regulated primarily by Article 233 of the Polish Criminal Code. In Polish practice, the more accurate term is usually false testimony, because criminal liability may arise from both an untrue statement and deliberate concealment of the truth.[1]

What is considered perjury in Poland?

Under Article 233 § 1 of the Criminal Code, a person who, while giving testimony intended to serve as evidence in court proceedings or another procedure conducted under an act, gives false testimony or conceals the truth may face imprisonment from six months to eight years.[1]

The provision can apply in criminal, civil, family, labour and administrative-related proceedings, provided that the testimony is formally taken as evidence. It may also apply to testimony given before prosecutors, police officers acting within their statutory powers, courts, or other authorised bodies.

For liability to arise, the person must act intentionally. A witness who makes an honest mistake, misunderstands a question, cannot accurately recall an event, or gives an estimate later shown to be incorrect does not automatically commit a false testimony crime. The prosecution must prove that the witness knew the statement was untrue or deliberately concealed the truth.

Lying under oath penalty in Poland

The basic lying under oath penalty in Poland is imprisonment from six months to eight years. The statutory range reflects the importance attached to reliable evidence in judicial and official proceedings.

The actual outcome depends on the facts of the case. Courts assess, among other matters:

• whether the false statement concerned a significant fact;
• whether it affected, or could have affected, the course of proceedings;
• whether the witness acted to protect themselves, another person or a business interest;
• whether the false testimony was repeated or planned in advance;
• whether the person later corrected the statement voluntarily.

A false testimony allegation can create risks beyond the criminal penalty itself. For a manager, employee or company representative, it may affect credibility in pending litigation, internal investigations, regulatory proceedings and relationships with business partners. It can also lead to parallel issues, including allegations concerning false evidence, document offences or disciplinary consequences.

When does Article 233 apply?

Article 233 does not criminalise every untrue statement made to another person. A false statement in a private conversation, commercial negotiation, media interview or internal meeting is not automatically false testimony. Other legal consequences may nevertheless arise, depending on the circumstances, including civil liability, fraud-related allegations, breach of employment duties or infringement of personal rights.

For a false testimony crime, the statement must be given in a procedure governed by law and intended as evidence. The status of the person making the statement is equally important. A witness has a duty to tell the truth. An accused person in criminal proceedings has procedural defence rights and is not treated as a witness for the purposes of Article 233 § 1.

Article 233 § 6 also applies, as appropriate, to a person making a false declaration where a provision of an act expressly permits such a declaration to be received under pain of criminal liability. Therefore, a false declaration made by a company representative may fall within Article 233 only where the applicable statute provides this form of criminal-law warning.[1]

This distinction matters in practice. Changing a procedural role from witness to suspect or accused can substantially affect both the person’s rights and the assessment of previous statements. Before answering questions in a case involving possible personal criminal exposure, the procedural status and the scope of the questions should be assessed carefully.

Three exceptions and limitations to false testimony liability

Polish law provides important safeguards. They should not be treated as a general right to lie, but they may determine whether criminal liability exists or whether punishment can be avoided.

1. No warning or formal pledge. Liability under Article 233 § 1 or § 1a requires that the person receiving the testimony acted within their powers and warned the witness about criminal liability for false testimony, or received a formal pledge from the witness. This is a statutory condition under Article 233 § 2 of the Criminal Code.[1]
2. Fear of criminal liability for oneself or a close person. Where a witness gives false testimony or conceals the truth because of fear of criminal liability for themselves or a person close to them, Article 233 § 1a provides for a lower penalty range — from three months to five years’ imprisonment. This is not full immunity.[1]
3. Unawareness of the right to refuse. A person is not punishable under Article 233 § 1a if they gave false testimony without knowing that they had the right to refuse testimony or refuse to answer a question. This follows from Article 233 § 3.[1]

Separately, the Criminal Procedure Code gives certain persons the right to refuse testimony, particularly persons close to the accused under Article 182. A witness may also refuse to answer a particular question where the answer could expose the witness or a close person to criminal liability or fiscal criminal liability, pursuant to Article 183.[2]

Using these rights lawfully is different from making an untrue statement. In many cases, the legally safer course is to invoke the right to refuse testimony or an answer rather than attempt to explain away an incriminating fact.

Can correcting false testimony reduce the consequences?

Yes, but timing and circumstances are decisive. Under Article 233 § 5, a court may apply extraordinary mitigation of punishment or even refrain from imposing a penalty if the false testimony, opinion, expert report or translation concerned a circumstance incapable of affecting the resolution of the case, or if the perpetrator voluntarily corrects it before the case is resolved, even by a non-final decision.[1]

A correction should be genuine, voluntary and procedurally clear. A late change of version after confrontation with documents, recordings or other evidence may be assessed differently from an early voluntary correction. It is also necessary to consider whether the correction itself may create exposure to other offences.

False testimony by experts, interpreters and corporate representatives

Article 233 also covers false opinions, expert reports, translations and certain declarations. An expert, appraiser or translator who knowingly presents a false opinion, expert report or translation intended to serve as evidence in proceedings may face imprisonment from one to ten years under Article 233 § 4.[1] This is particularly relevant in accounting, compliance, technical, medical and forensic matters.

For companies, risks often emerge during internal fraud investigations, AML reviews, regulatory inspections or disputes involving management. Employees should not be instructed to provide a predetermined version of events. Preserving documents, clarifying reporting lines and obtaining legal advice before formal questioning can reduce the risk of inconsistent or misleading statements.

This is informational material, not legal advice. The legal assessment depends on the procedural stage, the witness’s status, the wording of the questions and the available evidence.

If a false testimony issue arises in criminal proceedings, it may be appropriate to consult the matter with a criminal lawyer and discuss possible procedural steps. Early assessment may be important before submitting explanations, testimony or corrective statements.

FAQ – Perjury in Poland

Is perjury a crime in Poland?

Yes. Giving false testimony or concealing the truth in legally regulated evidentiary proceedings may constitute an offence under Article 233 of the Criminal Code.

What is the penalty for lying under oath in Poland?

The basic penalty is imprisonment from six months to eight years. In cases involving fear of criminal liability for oneself or a close person, Article 233 § 1a provides for imprisonment from three months to five years.

Can a witness refuse to answer a question in Poland?

Yes, in particular where an answer could expose the witness or a close person to criminal or fiscal criminal liability. The legal basis is Article 183 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Can a family member refuse to testify?

Generally, a person close to the accused may refuse testimony under Article 182 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The scope of this right depends on the relationship and procedural circumstances.

Is an accused person guilty of perjury for denying the allegations?

Not under Article 233 § 1 merely because they exercise the right of defence. An accused person is not questioned as a witness in their own criminal case. Other conduct, such as creating false evidence, may be assessed under different provisions.

Does correcting false testimony prevent punishment?

It may help in limited circumstances. Article 233 § 5 allows extraordinary mitigation of punishment or refraining from punishment where the false testimony, opinion, expert report or translation is voluntarily corrected before the case is resolved, even by a non-final decision. It may also apply where the false statement concerned a circumstance incapable of affecting the resolution of the case. This depends on the facts.

Bibliography

[1] Act of 6 June 1997 – Criminal Code, in particular Article 233, official text available through the Polish Legal Information System ISAP: https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=WDU19970880553.

[2] Act of 6 June 1997 – Code of Criminal Procedure, in particular Articles 182, 183, 187 and 190, official text available through the Polish Legal Information System ISAP: https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=WDU19970890555.