Supreme Court President: government and parliament must intervene to avoid legal chaos

Share

Co-founder and editor of Rule of Law in Poland and coordinator of The Wiktor Osiatyński Archive, a rule of law…

More

First President of the Supreme Court, Małgorzata Gersdorf, issued a statement imploring the Polish government and parliament to intervene in order to avoid an eruption of legal chaos in the wake of the 19 November judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU, issued in response to questions referred by the Labour Law and Social Security Chamber of the Supreme Court.



19 November 2019

 

Declaration of the Fist President of the Supreme Court

 

In the year 2004 the Poles have decided to join the European Union, an organisation whose goal it is to provide legal certainty for Europe. Such was the decision of the Nation, taken in form of a referendum.

 

Today, the highest-level judicial body of this structure – the Court of Justice of the European Union – has passed a judgement, being an answer to the requests for preliminary ruling made by the Supreme Court of Poland. The Court of Justice has recognized the judicial control of compliance of legal provisions regarding the court system with the law of the European Union.

 

The Court has acknowledged this issue as going beyond Polish internal affairs.

 

The Court has shared the Supreme Court’s reservations and decided, that the question of independence of the Disciplinary Chamber, raised in the request for preliminary ruling, as well as the question of the National Council of Judiciary’s impartiality, should be considered by the referring court, i.e. the Polish Supreme Court.

 

The Court of Justice has also indicated the requirements which have to be fulfilled by an independent court.

 

Such an interpretation of EU law, however, is binding not only to the Supreme Court, but to all courts and other state bodies to the extent that it may prove necessary to disapply the provisions of national law.

 

It is highly probable that issues raised in the ruling of the Court of Justice will become object of considerations and decisions of common and administrative courts. The referring court has been obliged by the Court of Justice to decide to whether the Disciplinary Chamber is a court to the understanding of the EU law, taking account of the way the Chamber has been brought into being. The relevant decisions of the Supreme Court will be passed without unnecessary delay, but it certainly needs to take some time.

 

In order to prevent and eliminate the uncertainties, as mentioned in the judgement today, or even legal chaos, the Government and the Parliament should not hesitate to take legislative steps.

 

The preservation of the rule of law in Poland, which stability has challenged already some time ago, requires such an intervention.

 

We need solutions which will contribute to the restoring of trust towards the National Council of Judiciary as well as towards the common courts and towards the Supreme Court, for the sake of good of Poland, seen both from the internal and international perspective.

 

Source: Supreme Court website



Author


Co-founder and editor of Rule of Law in Poland and coordinator of The Wiktor Osiatyński Archive, a rule of law…


More

Published

November 21, 2019

Tags

Supreme Courtdisciplinary proceedingsrule of lawjudicial independenceDisciplinary ChamberEuropean CommissionjudgesPolandNational Council of the JudiciaryZbigniew ZiobroCourt of JusticeCourt of Justice of the EUConstitutional TribunalAndrzej DudaEuropean UnionIgor Tuleyadisciplinary systemMinister of Justicepresidential electionsjudiciarydemocracyJarosław Kaczyńskielections 2020Beata Morawiecpreliminary rulingsCJEUmuzzle lawCommissioner for Human RightsFirst President of the Supreme Courtprosecutorsdisciplinary commissionerEuropean Arrest WarrantAdam BodnarCOVID-19OSCEPresidentProsecutor Generalfreedom of expressionLaw and JusticeNCJelectionsacting first president of the Supreme CourtMay 10 2020 electionsEuropean Court of Human RightsWaldemar Żurekmedia independenceAmsterdam District CourtKrzysztof ParchimowiczMateusz Morawiecki2017Freedom HouseExtraordinary Control and Public Affairs ChamberVenice CommissionConstitutionprosecutionHungarycriminal lawNational Prosecutordisciplinary liability for judgesNational Electoral CommissionMarek SafjanKamil ZaradkiewiczGeneral Assembly of the Supreme Court JudgesAleksander StepkowskiOrdo IurisPresident of PolandMałgorzata ManowskaJarosław GowinLGBTLGBT ideology free zonesSejmMichał LasotaZuzanna Rudzińska-BluszczSylwia Gregorczyk-AbramTHEMISMaciej NawackiEAWPaweł JuszczyszynAnna DalkowskaNetherlandsPiotr Schabdemocratic backslidingdecommunizationPrime Ministerfreedom of assemblyJulia PrzyłębskaLaw on the NCJrecommendationHuman Rights CommissionerCCBEThe Council of Bars and Law Societies of EuropereportArticle 7ZiobroSupreme Administrative CourtconditionalityPM Mateusz MorawieckiEuropean Association of Judges11 January March in WarsawcoronavirusPiSC-791/19Wojciech Hermelińskiresolution of 23 January 2020Stanisław PiotrowiczPiotr PszczółkowskiJarosław WyrembakLeon KieresAndrzej ZollPKWMałgorzata Gersdorfinfringment actionEU valuesENCJlex NGOcivil societyRussiaIsraelforeign agents lawOrganization of Security and Co-operation in EuropeFirst President of the Suprme CourtPresident of the Republic of PolandLGBT free zonesequalityChamber of Extraordinary Verificationhate crimeshate speechcriminal codeGrzęda v PolandXero Flor w Polsce Sp. z o.o. v. PolandBroda and Bojara v PolandŻurek v PolandSobczyńska and Others v PolandReczkowicz and Others v. PolandRafał Trzaskowskimedia lawIustitiaKrystian MarkiewiczPrzemysła RadzikSenateMarcin WarchołElżbieta KarskaMarcin RomanowskiJacek CzaputowiczPrzemysław Czarneklegislative practiceENAZbigniew BoniekdefamationcourtsOmbudsmanKraśnikNorwayNorwegian fundsNorwegian Ministry of Foreign AffairsMichał WawrykiewiczFree CourtsC-487/19Article 6 ECHRArticle 10 ECHRRegional Court in AmsterdamOpenbaar MinisterieUrsula von der LeyenEwa WrzosekAK judgmentSimpson judgmentEU law primacyForum Współpracy SędziówTVPmediapublic broadcasterLex Super OmniaAdam Tomczyńskiimmunitymutual trustLMBelgiumIrelandIrena MajcherAmsterdamBogdan ŚwięczkowskiNational Public ProsecutorPrzemysław Radzikthe Regional Court in WarsawCouncil of EuropeUnited Nationsjudcial independenceLeszek MazurMaciej Miteracriminal proceedingspopulisminterim measuresViktor OrbanOLAFautocratizationMultiannual Financial FrameworkNext Generation EUequal treatmentfundamental rightspoliceCT PresidentJustice Defence Committee – KOSEUWhite Paperlustrationtransitional justicepublic opinion pollSupreme Court President2018Nations in TransitCouncil of the EUStanisław ZabłockiEuropean ParliamentLIBE CommitteeFrans TimmermansUS Department of StateSwieczkowskiadvocate generalpress releaseRights and Values ProgrammeEU budgetC-619/18defamatory statementsWorld Justice Project awardintimidation of dissentersWojciech SadurskijudgetransferPechKochenovEvgeni TanchevFreedom in the WorldECJFrackowiakretirement ageAmnesty InternationalŁukasz PiebiakPiebiak gatehuman rightstrans-Atlantic valuesLSOlawyersAct of 20 December 2019repressive actKoen LenaertsharrassmentAlina CzubieniakMinistry of JusticeJustice FundGerard BirgfellerEwa Maciejewskapostal votepostal vote bill