A/HRC/43/50/Add.3 freedom of speech. Therefore, there are no objective grounds for claiming that there is a problem of self-censorship in Poland, which would impoverish Polish cultural life. Ad Part III A. The implementation of cultural rights in Poland paragraph 25, 26, 27 21. The Special Rapporteur refers to the Museum of the Second World War in Gdańsk and the Malta Festival. 22. The expiration of Director Machcewicz’s contract (World War II museum) is presented in bad, biased light, despite a detailed description included in item 13 of the attachment Answers to additional questions of the UN Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights. Once again, the content of explanations that was presented to the Special Rapporteur was ignored. 23. The dissolution of the contract with Paweł Machcewicz followed a merger of two cultural institutions – the legality of such solution was confirmed by courts (despite cassation appeals filed by Commissioner for Human Rights Adam Bodnar and the city of Gdańsk). Museum exhibitions are modified all over the world, especially when important historical facts are being omitted – therefore it is unclear why this fact is turned into an accusation. 24. The Special Rapporteur mentions “other directors” who “experienced similar pressure.” Once again, anonymous accusations are quoted. Therefore, it is difficult to respond to the allegation, which is a clear insinuation 25. The merger of the Museum of the Second World War and the Museum of Westerplatte and the War of 1939 was carried out in accordance with the Act on Organizing and Running Cultural Activity of 25 October 1991. According to the act of the Minister of Culture and National Heritage, who was the founder and organizer of both museum may merge (based on the Polish) any cultural institutions (museums included) but is obliged to provide a public notice of such attempt three months prior to the actual merge taking place (Article 18 of the Act). The Supreme Administrative Court confirmed the legality of the proceedings. This administrative decision was a matter of domestic law and as such, it does not relate to the international obligations. 26. After the merger, the Museum continues its mission. The decision of the merger of two similar museums was justified by the administrative, technical and financial reasons. It was also a common expectation to raise public awareness on the history of Poland and the heroic fight of Polish soldiers in the first hours and days of the World War II. 27. It is necessary to underline that the merger was carried out with respect to the existing effects of work of both institutions, including the immense effort made by the staff of the Museum of the Second World War to open the permanent exhibition, which functions today without any obstacles. Article 18.3 1. The organiser may merge cultural institutions, including cultural institutions conducting activities in various forms, or divide cultural institutions. 2. In the case of a merger of an artistic institution with a cultural institution other than an artistic institution, the cultural institution resulting from such a merger has the status of an artistic institution. 3. The organiser is obliged to inform the public about the intention and reasons for such a decision 3 months before the issue of the act on the merger or division of cultural institutions. . 3 Act on Organizing and Running Cultural Activity of 25 October 1991. 7