Tag: Court of Justice
NGOs and academics urge von der Leyen to block disciplinary measures with ECJ help [open letter]
Open Letter to the President of the European Commission regarding Poland’s disciplinary regime for judges and the urgent need for interim measures in Commission v Poland (C-791/19)
Oral justification of the Supreme Court judgment in connection with the CJEU ruling regarding the Disciplinary Chamber and the National Council of the Judiciary
Thanks to the Association of Judges “Themis”, we publish the translation of oral justification of the Supreme Court judgment of 5 December 2019 in case in which it requested the Court of Justice for preliminary ruling of 19 November 2019
Common Position on the Judgment in Joined Cases A.K. and Others (C-585/18, C-624/18 and C-625/18)
Following the delivery of the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union in Luxembourg on the National Council of the Judiciary and the Disciplinary Chamber, we emphasise that all authorities of the Republic of Poland are obliged to fully execute the said judgment.
Attacks on CJEU Advocate General after his crushing assessment of PiS-led judicial “reforms”
The Minister of Justice feels that the opinion of the Advocate General of the EU Court of Justice Evgeni Tanchev is incompatible with EU law and constitutes a “defence of pathology in the Polish judiciary.” If the CJEU concurs with the Advocate General’s opinion, following the judgment Poland will have to select a new National Council of the Judiciary. Changes will also be necessary in other EU Member States.
Disciplinary regime under ECJ review: a dispute over admissibility
On Tuesday, 18 June 2019, the European Court of Justice considered two preliminary requests submitted by courts in Łódź and Warsaw. Both courts are concerned whether the new system of disciplinary proceedings against judges meets EU standards, particularly those enshrined in the principle of effective judicial protection. However, the hearing was mainly focused not on particular provisions of law questioned by the Polish courts, but on the admissibility of the questions these courts referred to the ECJ.
AG Tanchev suggests that Poland violated judicial independence
According to the Court of Justice’s Advocate General, Poland failed to guarantee effective legal protection by lowering the retirement age of Supreme Court judges and granting the President the discretion to prolong their mandate. The AG opinion is not binding on the ECJ, but the bench usually follows its conclusions.
Act on the National Council of the Judiciary before the Constitutional Tribunal
Polish constitutional court delivered a ruling concerning the National Council of the Judiciary. The judgement might be crucial for the preliminary reference proceedings pending before the Court of Justice of the EU.
Judges ask Commission to intervene in disciplinary proceedings. Only CJEU can stop repressions
Frans Timmermans spoke with journalists on Tuesday, 19 February 2019, just prior to another debate in the General Affairs Council of the EU over breach of rule of law within the Article 7 TEU procedure initiated against Poland. This was the first meeting of the Council since the Polish government presented its report on 11 December 2018
The rule of law in Poland Actions by EU institutions and unaddressed recommendations of the European Commission
Provisions subordinating the judiciary to the executive (including disciplinary proceedings against judges), which are completely incompatible with European standards, are still in place.
Violations of the rule of law principles in Poland despite recent amendments
The Supreme Court has not been the sole judicial institution under attack by the ruling majority. Since November 2015 the PiS has been increasing political control over other key bodies of the system, including the Constitutional Tribunal, the prosecution, the National Council of Judiciary, and ordinary courts.
Venice Commission opinion on the “muzzle law”
Incredible official position of the Ministry of Justice regarding the opinion of the Venice Commission
“We nominated them”. Did Minister Ziobro accidentally reveal who supported the judges to the NCJ?
Gersdorf makes her move. Three Supreme Court chambers to rule on dodgy judicial nominations
Judges under fire: 43 judges already targeted by disciplinary officer and prosecutors