Articles for tag: EuGH, muzzle law, Poland, Polexit, Rechtsstaatlichkeit

Protecting Polish Judges from Political Control

After many years of judicial “reforms”, Kaczyński’s Poland may soon become the EU’s second authoritarian Member State, even as the European Court of Justice increasingly attempted to deal with different aspects of Kaczyński’s multi-pronged attacks on judicial independence. In Case C-791/19, the found the new disciplinary regime for Polish judges to be incompatible with EU law while in Case C-204/21 R, the Vice-President of the ECJ ordered the immediate suspension of the application of the legislative provisions governing the jurisdiction of the infamous “Disciplinary Chamber”.

20. Juli 2021

, , , ,

Polexit or judicial dialogue?

In the world of EU law, Poland and the rule of law, it was a wild third week of July. A series of events unfolded in Warsaw and Luxembourg, adding to the saga of Polish rule of law travails before courts. All levels of Polish government and bodies controlled by the ruling party have decried CJEU interim orders and judgments, indicating a complete lack of will to comply with EU law and CJEU rulings. Is a "Polexit" looming?

19. Juli 2021

, , , ,

Die Stunde des Gesetzgebers

Im vergangenen Jahr aber hat der Zweite Senat des Bundesverfassungsgerichts mit dem PSPP-Urteil eine Dynamik in Gang gesetzt, die das Kraftfeld zwischen nationaler und supranationaler Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit zur Entladung zu bringen und damit die gesamte Europäische Union irreparabel zu beschädigen droht. Tatsächlich legen dieser und weitere Konflikte gravierende Mängel in der Architektur des Verfassungsgerichtsverbunds offen – und zwar auf allen Seiten. Für die Bundesregierung liegt darin eine unerwartete Chance.

19. Juli 2021

, , ,

All Eyes on LGBTQI Rights

In Fedotova v Russia, the ECtHR found that Russia overstepped the boundaries of its otherwise broad margin of appreciation because it had “no legal framework capable of protecting the applicants’ relationships as same-sex couples has been available under domestic law”. The case foreshadows a future wherein the familiar line of cases advancing the protection of same sex couples will need to be complemented by a jurisprudence that engages with the backslash against LGBTQI rights.

19. Juli 2021

, , , , ,

Ein Dilemma, kein Staatsstreich

Jetzt ist es also tatsächlich passiert: Das polnische Verfassungsgericht verneint in einem zentralen Bereich die Bindung an Entscheidungen des EuGH. Mit dem prinzipiellen Vorrang des Europarechts steht damit eine der fundamentalen Säulen der europäischen Integration in Frage. Ist der Vorgang vergleichbar mit dem, was das deutsche Bundesverfassungsgericht im PSPP-Urteil getan hat?

15. Juli 2021

, , , ,

Kampf oder diplomatischer Ausgleich?

Nachdem nun die Europäische Kommission angekündigt hat, sie werde das Urteil des BVerfG zum Gegenstand eines Vertragsverletzungsverfahrens machen, hat der frühere Gerichtspräsident Andreas Vosskuhle die Vermutung geäußert, dass die Europäische Kommission und der EuGH in einem kollusiven Zusammenwirken danach strebten, die Europäische Union unter der Hand in einen europäischen Bundesstaat zu verwandeln. Die Auseinandersetzung zwischen den beiden höchsten Gerichten entwickelt sich damit zu einem subkutan ausgetragenen Verfassungsdrama, das allmählich auch eine breitere Öffentlichkeit beunruhigen muss.

15. Juli 2021

, , , ,

Unpersuasive but Wise

On 16 June, by two parallel orders, the EU Court of Justice said the last word on the legality of advocate general Sharpston’s divestment. In the end, the Court did little more than reiterate the press statement it made in response to the member states’ declaration on the subject. The member states made a legitimate decision based on an old custom, and the Court could do nothing but oblige.

24. Juni 2021

, ,

Predictable and Unsatisfying

Most EU lawyers have already seen it looming on the horizon: On 16 June 2021, former Advocate General Eleanor Sharpston lost the legal dispute against her former employer, the European Court of Justice. Although the outcome in this regard was predictable, the decision is overall somewhat unsatisfying. The CJEU seems to be of that opinion in finding that Sharpston’s mandate ended automatically with the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the EU. The Court does so without revealing its legal considerations and interpretation of EU primary law in its reasoning.

20. Juni 2021

, , , ,

CJEU’s Independence and Lawful Composition in Question (Part V)

The Sharpston Affair is over, at least as a matter of proceedings before the CJEU. The litigation had aimed at saving the CJEU’s dignity, but the opposite result has been achieved. At the critical juncture when the CJEU’s authority stands contested by the courts of established democracies, the phony panels of the ‘illiberal’ ones, as well as the immature in-betweens, the CJEU managed to pour oil into the fire and signed off its own lack of independence: when it is needed the most, its legitimacy is in the doghouse.

19. Juni 2021

, ,

A Tale of Primacy Part. II

On 18 May 2021, the CJEU issued a judgment on several requests for preliminary ruling by Romanian national courts regarding the impact of EU law on Romanian laws on the judiciary and the CVM. On 8 June, the Romanian Constitutional Court issued a decision pertaining to the subject. In a succession of legal nonsense, it shattered hope that the CJEU’s judgment could be a guide for national courts for applying the primacy of the EU law.

18. Juni 2021

, , , ,