European Commission refers Poland to the Court of Justice to protect judges from political control


European Commission decided to refer Poland to the Court of Justice of the EU regarding the new disciplinary regime for Polish judges, requesting an expedited procedure.
On 3 April 2019, the Commission launched this infringement procedure on the grounds that the new disciplinary regime undermines the judicial independence of Polish judges and does not ensure the necessary guarantees to protect judges from political control, as required by the Court of Justice of the EU.
Specifically, the Polish law allows ordinary court judges to be subjected to disciplinary investigations, procedures and sanctions on the basis of the content of their judicial decisions, including the exercise of their right under Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) to request preliminary rulings from the Court of Justice of the EU.
Moreover, the new disciplinary regime does not guarantee the independence and impartiality of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court, which is composed solely of judges selected by the National Council for the Judiciary, which is itself politically appointed by the Polish Parliament (Sejm).
Furthermore, the new disciplinary regime does not ensure that a court ‘established by law' will decide in the first instance on disciplinary proceedings against ordinary court judges. Instead, it empowers the President of the Disciplinary Chamber to determine, on an ad-hoc basis and with an almost unfettered discretion, the disciplinary court of first instance to hear a given case brought against an ordinary court judge.
The new regime no longer guarantees that cases are processed within a reasonable timeframe, allowing the Minister of Justice to keep charges pending over ordinary court judges through disciplinary officers appointed by the Minister. The new regime also affects ordinary court judges' right of defence. In short, judges are not insulated from political control and thus judicial independence is violated.
On 3 April 2019, the Commission addressed a letter of formal notice to Poland. Following a thorough analysis of the response received, the Commission concluded that the response did not alleviate the legal concerns, and took the next step in the process, sending a reasoned opinion on 17 July 2019. In its latest response, Poland again failed to address the Commission's concerns.
The Commission has therefore decided to refer Poland to the Court of Justice of the EU. In view of the potential impact of the disciplinary regime on judicial independence, a request for an expedited procedure is warranted, to obtain a final judgment as soon as possible.
This would also be in line with the Commission's Communication of 17 July 2019 entitled “Strengthening the rule of law within the Union - A blueprint for action”, which underlines that building on its existing approach to enforcement and on developing case law of the Court of Justice of the EU, the Commission will pursue a strategic approach to infringement proceedings related to the rule of law, requesting expedited proceedings and interim measures whenever necessary.
Background
The rule of law is one of the common values upon which the European Union is founded and common to all Member States. It is enshrined as such in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union. The rule of law is essential for the functioning of the EU as a whole, for example with regard to the internal market, cooperation in the area of Justice and Home Affairs, and ensuring that national judges, who are also EU judges, can fulfil their role in ensuring the application of EU law and can properly interact with the Court of Justice of the EU in the context of preliminary ruling procedures. The Commission's Communications of 3 April and 17 July 2019 on the rule of law explain the existing toolbox for enforcing the rule of law and the Commission's actions and proposals to further strengthen that toolbox.
The European Commission, together with other Union institutions and the Member States, is responsible under the Treaties for guaranteeing the rule of law as a fundamental value of our Union and making sure that EU law, values and principles are respected.
Events in Poland led the European Commission to open a dialogue with the Polish Government in January 2016 under the Rule of Law Framework and then activate the Article 7(1) TEU procedure on 20 December 2017. The process is based on a continuous dialogue between the Commission and the Member State concerned. The Commission keeps the European Parliament and Council regularly informed.
In addition, on 2 July 2018, the Commission launched an infringement procedure on the Polish law on the Supreme Court, on the grounds of its retirement provisions and their impact on the independence of the Supreme Court. On 24 September 2018, the Commission decided to refer the case to the Court of Justice of the EU, which delivered its final judgement on 24 June 2019. The Court has found that lowering the retirement age of judges of the Supreme Court is contrary to EU law and breaches the principle of the irremovability of judges and thus that of judicial independence.
On 29 July 2017, the Commission launched an infringement procedure on the Polish Law on Ordinary Courts, on the grounds of its retirement provisions and their impact on the independence of the judiciary. The Commission decided to refer this case to the Court of Justice of the EU on 20 December 2017. (europa.eu)

Comments

Post a Comment

Editorial

Editorial
George Kazoleas, Lawyer

Top Stories

Ombudsman inquiry on Commission President’s text messages is a wake-up call for EU

Image
The European Ombudsman inquiry into the Commission’s handling of a request for text messages between its President and the CEO of a pharmaceutical company is a wake-up call for all EU institutions about ensuring accountability in an era of instant messaging. One year after the initial request by a journalist, the Commission has still not clarified whether messages reported to concern major vaccine procurement deals exist and whether the public is entitled to see them. The Ombudsman had asked the Commission, in a finding of maladministration in January, to conduct a more thorough search for the text messages. The Commission’s recent response failed to say whether it had looked directly and correctly for the text messages and if not, why not. While the response recognised that work-related text messages can be EU documents, it reiterated that the Commission’s internal policy is, in effect, not to register text messages. The Ombudsman has closed  the inquiry  and upheld...
Read more

Daily Mail publisher wins case against ‘success fees’ paid to lawyers (ECtHR)

Image
Obligation on publisher of the Daily Mail to pay substantial “success fees" in defamation and breach of privacy cases was excessive. The case Associated Newspapers Limited v. the United Kingdom (application no. 37398/21) concerned the fact that Associated Newspapers Limited the publisher of the Daily Mail and the Mail on Sunday had been obliged to pay extensive costs incurred by claimants who had successfully sued it in privacy and/or defamation proceedings following articles it had published in print or online in 2017 and 2019.  Since one of the claimants had entered into a conditional fee arrangement (CFA) with his legal representative, and both had taken out “after-the-event” (ATE) insurance, Associated Newspapers Limited had been liable not only for their base costs, but also for fee uplifts including the “success fee” in the CFA and for their ATE insurance premiums.  In Chamber judgment (12.11.2024) in the case, the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that t...
Read more

ECtHR elects a new Vice-President of the Court and two new Section Presidents

Image
The European Court of Human Rights has elected on 23.9.2024 a new Vice-President of the Court – Judge Ivana Jelić (elected in respect of Montenegro). She will take up her duties on 1 November 2024.  The Court has also elected at the same date two new Section Presidents – Judges Lado Chanturia (elected in respect of Georgia) and Ioannis Ktistakis (elected in respect of Greece). They will also take up their duties on 1 November 2024. Ivana Jelić was born on 17 March 1975 in Podgorica, Montenegro and was elected Judge of the European Court of Human Rights on 12 July 2018. Lado Chanturia was born on 14 April 1963 in Tsalenjikha, Georgia, was elected Judge of the European Court of Human Rights on 8 January 2018 and is Vice-President of Section since 18 May 2023. Ioannis Ktistakis was born on 3 January 1971 in Thebes, Greece and was elected Judge of the European Court of Human Rights on 8 March 2021. (source/photo: echr.coe.int) Read more here
Read more

Intellectual property: the figurative sign consisting of the phrase ‘RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F* *K yourself’ in Russian and English cannot be registered as an EU trade mark

Image
In its Judgment in Case T-82/24 (Administration of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine v EUIPO) (RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F**K YOURSELF) the General Court ruled that the figurative sign consisting of the phrase ‘RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F* *K yourself’ in Russian and English cannot be registered as an EU trade mark. That phrase, which has become a symbol of Ukraine’s fight against Russian aggression, is not perceived as an indication of a commercial origin.  The Administration of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine (Kyiv, Ukraine) requests the General Court of the European Union to annul the decision of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 1 st December 2023, which refused registration of the following figurative sign as an EU trade mark: ‘RUSSIAN WARSHIP, GO F* *K yourself’ That mark is a war cry uttered by the Ukrainian border guard on Snake Island on 24th February 2022, the first day of the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine. Registration was sou...
Read more

The banks Crédit agricole and Credit Suisse participated in a cartel in the sector for suprasovereign bonds, sovereign bonds and public agency bonds denominated in US dollars

Image
According to the Judgment of the General Court in Cases T-386/21 (Crédit agricole and Crédit agricole Corporate and Investment Bank v Commission) and T-406/21 (UBS Group and Credit Suisse Securities (Europe) v Commission), the banks Crédit agricole and Credit Suisse participated in a cartel in the sector for suprasovereign bonds, sovereign bonds and public agency bonds denominated in US dollars (‘SSA Bonds’).  The General Court of the European Union confirms the Commission’s finding of an infringement and maintains the amount of the fines imposed in 2021. In 2018, the European Commission initiated proceedings for infringement of the competition rules involving Deutsche Bank, Bank of America, Crédit agricole and Credit Suisse (now UBS Group [1] ).  In 2021, the Commission found that those banks had entered into an agreement on the secondary market for suprasovereign, sovereign and agency bonds denominated in dollars (SSA bonds). According to the Commission, traders employed by ...
Read more

European Ombudsman asks Commission to publish details of its handling of senior staff move to law firm

Image
The European Ombudsman has asked the European Commission to publish details about how it has handled the planned move by a former director in its competition department to the Brussels office of a US corporate law firm as a partner. Any restrictions that have been placed on the activities of the former director to mitigate potential conflicts of interest should be made public without delay, said the Ombudsman. She noted that public information about the move came from the law firm and gives the impression that the Commission has allowed a senior official to work for a company that anticipates major benefits from their inside knowledge.  The Ombudsman also noted that the Commission declined to give details about the individual’s professional experience despite the fact that the law firm itself has put out a press release detailing it. The Ombudsman has previously criticised a tendency in the EU administration to underestimate the potential negative effects of staff moves to th...
Read more

A national court is not required to apply a decision of its constitutional court that infringes EU law (ECJ)

Image
In its Judgment of 26.9.2024 in Case C-792/22 (Energotehnica) the Court of Justice ruled as regards the right to an effective remedy that a national court is not required to apply a decision of its constitutional court that infringes EU law. In such a case, the national court may not be penalised.  Following the death of an electrician by electrocution during a maintenance operation, an administrative procedure was initiated against his employer. At the same time, criminal proceedings for negligence and manslaughter were initiated against the supervisor. The victim’s next of kin also became civil parties to the criminal proceedings.  The administrative court hearing the dispute concluded that the present case did not involve an ‘accident at work’. It annulled the administrative penalties imposed on the employer. According to national legislation, as interpreted by the Romanian Constitutional Court, that administrative decision prevents the criminal court from reconsidering whe...
Read more