Articles for tag: Disciplinary ChamberEGMREMRKPolandRechtsstaatlichkeit

Hundreds of judges appointed in violation of the ECHR?

On 22 July 2021, the European Court of Human Rights issued its third judgment concerning the rule of law crisis in Poland. In Reczkowicz v. Poland the Court ruled that the Disciplinary Chamber which dismissed the cassation complaint of the applicant did not meet the standard of a “right to a court established by law” guaranteed under Article 6 § 1 the Convention. The judgment is important not only because the ECtHR reviewed the status of the Disciplinary Chamber – a controversial body that was also the subject of a recent CJEU judgment – but also because it seems that the reasoning of the Court can be applied to hundreds of other newly appointed judges.

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”.

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?

An Appeal to Polish Authorities

On 23 June, Bartosz Kramek, a Polish activist and the Chair of the Supervisory Board of the Open Dialogue Foundation (ODF), a Poland-based international NGO on the frontlines of the fight for the rule of law in the country, was arrested by he Internal Security Agency. Mr Kramek is currently under unconditional pre-trial detention. The court approved placing him under detention with a bail of 300,000 PLN to be delivered by 8 July 2021. The prosecutor filed an objection, which means that, irrespective of the payment, Mr Kramek will not be released until the court’s decision becomes final, that is, until the second-instance court examines the prosecutor’s appeal. If the court agrees, a well-known government critic and civic activist will be put behind bars for at least 3 months, making him a political prisoner in an EU Member State.

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.

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.

»Non-Existent«

Last Tuesday, the Polish Constitutional Tribunal delivered a ruling which makes the extent of the crisis of the rule of law in Poland unambiguously clear. And it shows how the gap with Europe is widening day by day. If the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe lets this pass, it will not only be a blow to the authority and effectiveness of the Strasbourg Court of Human Rights. Then the guardians of the rule of law will have surrendered even faster than we thought.

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.

A Hollow Threat

On 10 June, the European Parliament passed a resolution on the application of the Conditionality Regulation and threatens to take the EU Commission to Court. However, the very peculiar ‘action for failure to act’ set out in Article 265 TFEU is not an appropriate procedure to solve the problem at issue. The Parliament should employ the more political means at its disposal to tackle a problem that is ultimately political in nature.