The European Court of Human Rights will assess whether President Duda broke the law

Share

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

More

The European Court of Human Rights will rule on the cases of eight people who were recommended by the ‘old’, legal National Council of the Judiciary to the Supreme Court, among others, whereas President Duda refused to appoint them without giving reasons.



The European Court of Human Rights informed the Polish authorities that it will hear the applications of eight judges who the legal National Council of the Judiciary recommended in 2016 and 2017 to senior judicial positions, including to the Supreme Court, but who President Andrzej Duda refused to appoint without giving reasons,

 

This is about nominations of the judges to the Supreme Court, the Voivodship Administrative Court, the Regional Court and the Military Regional Court. The President delayed issuing decisions in these cases until December 2021. He then issued his decisions without a justification.

 

The ECtHR will examine Kaspryszyn v Poland (application no. 35890/22) as a priority case – just like the other applications regarding systemic rule of law problems in Poland.

 

The Polish government has until 29 March to present its position. The Justice Defence Committee (KOS) is representing the applicants.

 

The ECtHR has more than 100 cases regarding judicial independence and the operation of the justice system in Poland. Complaints about breaches of the right to a trial in court, the right to a remedy and a breach of reputation.

 

The ‘old’ National Council of the Judiciary, elected on a basis that was compliant with the Constitution, recommended:

  • Professor Aleksander Kappes and Professor Wojciech Kocot, as well as Appeal Court Judges Janusz Kaspryszyn and Małgorzata Polanska-Farion to the Supreme Court; 
  • Judge Grzegorz Borkowski to the Voivodship Administrative Court;
  • Judges Agnieszka Łukaszuk, Grzegorz Miśkiewicz and Tomasz Wojciechowski to the Court of Appeal;
  • Judges Krzysztof Ptasiewicz and Piotr Raczkowski to the Regional Court;
  • Judge Rafał Buchajczuk to the Regional Military Court.

 

The ten recommended by the NCJ filed an application with the ECtHR regarding the Polish President’s decisions refusing to appoint them to judicial positions. The decisions, which were dated 27 December 2021, were published on 10 January 2022.

 

The ECtHR informed the Polish authorities on 1 June 2022 that it would examine the complaints of the professors of law – Professor Wojciech Kocot from the University of Warsaw and Professor Aleksander Kappes from the University of Łódź.

 

Now, the ECtHR has announced that it will examine the complaints of eight judges in a single case. They apply to the same facts and the applicants are raising the same allegations of breaches of the European Convention on Human Rights in them.

 

The applicants allege that their rights, which are protected by Article 6 of the Convention (the right to a fair trial) and Article 13 of the Convention (the right to an effective remedy), were breached because they could not appeal against the President’s decision.

 

They also claim that Article 8 of the Convention (the right to respect for private and family life) was breached, arguing that the Polish President’s prolonged silence with regard to the recommendation of the NCJ as to their nominations and the President’s decision refusing to appoint them breached their good names.

 

The ECtHR finds for the Polish judges 

 

The Court has been successively – and as a priority – ruling on cases regarding the systemic changes in the judiciary since 2015, including numerous cases filed by judges.

 

In all of its rulings to date, it found for the applicant judges and ruled that the Polish authorities had breached the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights. It has also awarded the applicants tens of thousands of euros in damages.

 

 

The rulings applied to the premature termination of the term of office of members of the old National Council of the Judiciary (case of judges Jan Grzęda and Waldemar Żurek), the premature termination of the term of office of the vice-presidents of the Regional Court in Kielce (cases of judges Mariusz Broda and Alina Bojara), adjudication in the cases of the judges by the Chamber of Extraordinary Control and Public Affairs of the Supreme Court (cases of Judges Monika Dolińska-Ficek and Artur Ozimek) and the suspension of a judge by the Disciplinary Chamber (the case of Judge Paweł Juszczyszyn).

 

Furthermore, the ECtHR also issued a number of interim measures in cases filed by judges. These oblige the Polish authorities to refrain from taking action that the applicants believe breaches their rights, which are protected by the European Convention on Human Rights, until the Court issues a ruling. The ECtHR has issued (several times in several cases) freezing orders in the cases of Judges:

 

  • Włodzimierz Wróbel;
  • Marzanna Piekarska-Drążek;
  • Adam Synkiewicz, Agnieszka Niklas-Bibik and Joanna Hetnarowicz-Sikora;
  • Anna Głowacka;
  • Andrzej Stępka; 
  • Tomasz Zawiślak;
  • Piotr Raczkowski, Aleksandra Janas and Andrzej Sterkowicz;
  • Waldemar Żurek;
  • Ewa Leszczyńska-Furtak and Ewa Gregajtys.

Applications waiting for consideration

 

The following are among those that are waiting for examination by the Court:

 

  • applications regarding President Kaczyński’s and President Duda’s refusal to appoint judges filed by Judge Joanna Sobczyńska (no. 62765/14) and other judges (nos. 62769/14, 62772/14 and 11708/18);
  • three applications filed by Judge Igor Tuleya regarding the lifting of his immunity by the Disciplinary Chamber, disciplinary proceedings and the refusal to allow him to work;
  • applications of judges regarding suspension by the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court filed by Judges Maciej Ferek (no. 22591/22), Piotr Gąciarek (no. 27444/22), Maciej Rutkowicz (no. 18380/22) and Krzysztof Chmielewski (no. 323017/22);
  • applications of judges regarding suspension by the Minister of Justice filed by Judges Adam Synkiewicz, Marta Pilśnik, Agnieszka Niklas-Bibik, Marzanna Piekarska-Drążek, Joanna Hetnarowicz-Sikora and Anna Głowacka;
  • applications of judges for harassment for issuing rulings and defending the rule of law filed by Judges Waldemar Żurek, Łukasz Biliński, Piotr Gąciarek, Agnieszka Niklas-Bibik, Maciej Czajka, Beata Morawiec, Wojciech Maczuga, Katarzyna Wierzbicka, Anna Ptaszek, Paweł Juszczyszyn, Ewa Leszczyńska-Furtak and Ewa Gregajtys.

 

The article was published in Polish in OKO.press, February 13, 2023.



Author


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


More

Published

February 17, 2023

Tags

Supreme CourtDisciplinary ChamberConstitutional TribunalPolandjudgesdisciplinary proceedingsrule of lawZbigniew ZiobroCourt of Justice of the EUNational Council of the Judiciaryjudicial independenceEuropean CommissionEuropean UnionMałgorzata ManowskaAndrzej DudaCourt of JusticeIgor TuleyaEuropean Court of Human Rightsdisciplinary systemMinister of JusticeJarosław KaczyńskiMateusz MorawieckiCJEUmuzzle lawCommissioner for Human RightsNational Recovery PlanAdam BodnardemocracyWaldemar ŻurekPrzemysław Radzikcriminal lawpresidential electionselectionsKamil Zaradkiewiczdisciplinary commissionerPiotr Schabmedia freedomneo-judgeselections 2023judiciaryFirst President of the Supreme Courtpreliminary rulingsSupreme Administrative CourtHungaryelections 2020K 3/21Dagmara Pawełczyk-WoickaNational Council for JudiciaryharassmentJulia PrzyłębskaProsecutor GeneralprosecutorsŁukasz PiebiakMichał LasotaBeata MorawiecPaweł JuszczyszynCourt of Justice of the European UnionPrime MinisterPresidentConstitutionCOVID-19European Arrest WarrantMaciej NawackiCriminal ChamberRegional Court in KrakówRecovery FundExtraordinary Control and Public Affairs ChamberEU budgetfreedom of expressiondisciplinary liability for judgesWojciech HermelińskiMarek SafjanMałgorzata GersdorfSejmMaciej Ferekfreedom of assemblyconditionalityLaw and JusticeprosecutionNCJMinistry of JusticeJustice FundNational ProsecutorPiSStanisław PiotrowiczAleksander StepkowskiOSCEPresident of the Republic of PolandIustitiacourtsTHEMISimmunityAnna DalkowskaNational Public ProsecutorCouncil of Europecriminal proceedingsStanisław Biernatconditionality mechanismWłodzimierz WróbelLabour and Social Security Chambercommission on Russian influence2017policeJustice Defence Committee – KOSFreedom HouseSupreme Court PresidentArticle 7Venice CommissionPM Mateusz MorawieckiNational Electoral CommissionJarosław WyrembakAndrzej Zollacting first president of the Supreme CourtOrdo IurisMay 10 2020 electionsPresident of PolandLGBTXero Flor w Polsce Sp. z o.o. v. PolandBroda and Bojara v PolandReczkowicz and Others v. Polandmedia independenceKrystian MarkiewiczSylwia Gregorczyk-AbramAmsterdam District CourtKrzysztof ParchimowiczMichał WawrykiewiczArticle 6 ECHREAWUrsula von der LeyenTVPmediaLex Super OmniaLech GarlickiEwa ŁętowskaStrategic Lawsuits Against Public ParticipationAndrzej StępkaPiotr GąciarekcorruptionP 7/20K 7/21Lex DudaNational Reconstruction PlanProfessional Liability ChambersuspensionparliamentJarosław DudziczChamber of Professional Liabilityelectoral codePiotr Prusinowskidemocratic backslidingdecommunizationLaw on the NCJrecommendationHuman Rights CommissionerCCBEThe Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europepublic opinion pollreportEuropean ParliamentZiobrointimidation of dissenterstransferretirement agePiebiak gatehuman rightsEuropean Association of Judges11 January March in WarsawcoronavirusC-791/19Piotr PszczółkowskiGeneral Assembly of the Supreme Court Judgeslex NGOcivil societyRussiaJarosław GowinLGBT ideology free zonescriminal codeSenateZuzanna Rudzińska-BluszczMarcin WarchołdefamationFree CourtsEwa WrzosekEU law primacyAdam TomczyńskiBelgiumNetherlandsBogdan Święczkowskijudcial independenceMaciej MiteraViktor OrbanOLAFNext Generation EUvetoabortionJózef IwulskiTeresa Dębowska-RomanowskaKazimierz DziałochaMirosław GranatAdam JamrózStefan JaworskiBiruta Lewaszkiewicz-PetrykowskaWojciech ŁączkowskiMarek MazurkiewiczAndrzej MączyńskiJanusz NiemcewiczMałgorzata Pyziak- SzafnickaStanisław RymarFerdynand RymarzAndrzej RzeplińskiJerzy StępieńPiotr TulejaSławomira Wronkowska-JaśkiewiczMirosław WyrzykowskiBohdan ZdziennickiMarek ZubikDidier ReyndersSLAPPOKO.pressDariusz ZawistowskiMichał LaskowskiMarek PietruszyńskiKrystyna PawłowiczMariusz MuszyńskiPaweł FilipekMaciej TaborowskiMarian BanaśSupreme Audit OfficeAdam SynakiewiczBelarusstate of emergencyKrakówXero Flor v. PolandAstradsson v IcelandK 6/21Civil ChamberJoanna Misztal-KoneckaPegasusMariusz KamińskisurveillanceCentral Anti-Corruption BureauJoanna Hetnarowicz-SikoraEdyta Barańskaright to fair trialUkraineKonrad WytrykowskiJakub IwaniecDariusz DrajewiczRafał Puchalskismear campaignmilestonesConstitutional Tribunal PresidentMarzanna Piekarska-Drążekelectoral processWojciech Maczugapublic medialexTuskcourt changeselections integrityelections fairnessabuse of state resourcesPATFoxpopulismequal treatmentfundamental rightsCT PresidentEUWhite Paperlustrationtransitional justice2018Nations in TransitCouncil of the EUStanisław ZabłockiLIBE CommitteeFrans TimmermansUS Department of StateSwieczkowskiadvocate generalpress releaseRights and Values ProgrammeC-619/18defamatory statementsWorld Justice Project awardWojciech SadurskijudgePechKochenovEvgeni TanchevFreedom in the WorldECJFrackowiakAmnesty Internationaltrans-Atlantic valuesLSOlawyersAct of 20 December 2019repressive actKoen LenaertsharrassmentAlina CzubieniakGerard BirgfellerEwa Maciejewskapostal votepostal vote billresolution of 23 January 2020Leon KieresPKWinfringment actionEU valuesENCJIsraelforeign agents lawOrganization of Security and Co-operation in EuropeFirst President of the Suprme CourtLGBT free zonesequalityChamber of Extraordinary Verificationhate crimeshate speechGrzęda v PolandŻurek v PolandSobczyńska and Others v PolandRafał Trzaskowskimedia lawPrzemysła RadzikElżbieta KarskaMarcin RomanowskiJacek CzaputowiczPrzemysław Czarneklegislative practiceENAZbigniew BoniekOmbudsmanKraśnikNorwayNorwegian fundsNorwegian Ministry of Foreign AffairsC-487/19Article 10 ECHRRegional Court in AmsterdamOpenbaar MinisterieAK judgmentSimpson judgmentForum Współpracy Sędziówpublic broadcastermutual trustLMIrelandIrena MajcherAmsterdamthe Regional Court in WarsawUnited NationsLeszek Mazurinterim measuresautocratizationMultiannual Financial Frameworkabortion rulingproteststhe NetherlandsDenmarkSwedenFinlandMariusz KrasońGermanyCelmerC354/20 PPUC412/20 PPUAusl 301 AR 104/19Karlsruheact on misdemeanoursCivil Service ActParliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europemedia taxadvertising taxmediabezwyboruJacek KurskiKESMAIndex.huTelex.huJelenJózsef SzájerKlubrádióGazeta WyborczaPollitykaBrussels IRome IIArticle 2Forum shoppingtransparencyEuropean Economic and Social CommitteeSebastian KaletaC-156/21C-157/21Marek PiertuszyńskiNational Prosecutor’s OfficeBogdan ŚwiączkowskiDisicplinary ChamberTribunal of StateOlsztyn courtPrzemysła CzarnekEducation MinisterIpsosOlimpia Barańska-MałuszeHudocKonrad SzymańskiPiotr BogdanowiczPiotr Burasauthoritarian equilibriumArticle 258clientelismoligarchic systemEuropean Public Prosecutor's OfficePolish National FoundationLux VeritatisMałgorzata BednarekPiotr WawrzykTVNjournalistslexTVNPolish mediaRzeszówborderprimacyEU treatiesAgnieszka Niklas-BibikSłupsk Regional CourtMaciej RutkiewiczMirosław Wróblewskiright to protestSławomir JęksaWiktor JoachimkowskiRoman GiertychMichał WośMinistry of FinanceJacek SasinErnest BejdaThe First President of the Supreme CourtMaciej CzajkaMariusz JałoszewskiŁukasz RadkepolexitDolińska-Ficek and Ozimek v PolandPaulina Kieszkowska-KnapikMaria Ejchart-DuboisAgreement for the Rule of LawPorozumienie dla PraworządnościAct sanitising the judiciaryMarek AstCourt of Appeal in KrakówPutinismKaczyńskiPaulina AslanowiczJarosław MatrasMałgorzata Wąsek-Wiaderekct on the Protection of the Populatiolegislationlex WośRome StatuteInternational Criminal CourtAntykastaStanisław ZdunIrena BochniakKrystyna Morawa-FryźlewiczKatarzyna ChmuraGrzegorz FurmankiewiczMarek JaskulskiJoanna Kołodziej-MichałowiczEwa ŁąpińskaZbigniew ŁupinaPaweł StyrnaKasta/AntykastaAndrzej SkowronŁukasz BilińskiIvan MischenkoMonika FrąckowiakArkadiusz CichockiEmilia SzmydtTomasz SzmydtE-mail scandalDworczyk leaksMichał Dworczykmedia pluralism#RecoveryFilesrepairing the rule of lawBohdan BieniekMarcin KrajewskiMałgorzata Dobiecka-WoźniakChamber of Extraordinary Control and Public AffairsWiesław KozielewiczNational Recovery Plan Monitoring CommitteeGrzegorz PudaPiotr MazurekJerzy KwaśniewskiPetros Tovmasyancourt presidentsODIHRFull-Scale Election Observation MissionNGOKarolina MiklaszewskaRafał LisakMałgorzata FroncJędrzej Dessoulavy-ŚliwińskiSebastian MazurekElżbieta Jabłońska-MalikSzymon Szynkowski vel SękJoanna Scheuring-Wielgusinsulting religious feelingsoppositionAdam GendźwiłłDariusz Dończyktest of independenceTomasz KoszewskiJakub KwiecińskidiscriminationAct on the Supreme Courtelectoral commissionsEuropean Court of HuKrzysztof RączkaPoznańKoan LenaertsKarol WeitzKaspryszyn v PolandNCR&DNCBiRThe National Centre for Research and DevelopmentEuropean Anti-Fraud Office OLAFJustyna WydrzyńskaAgnieszka Brygidyr-DoroszJoanna KnobelCrimes of espionageextraordinary commissionZbigniew KapińskiAnna GłowackaCourt of Appeal in WarsawOsiatyński'a ArchiveUS State DepartmentAssessment Actenvironmentinvestmentstrategic investmentgag lawsuitslex RaczkowskiPiotr Raczkowskithe Spy ActdisinformationNational Broadcasting Councilelection fairnessDobrochna Bach-GoleckaRafał WojciechowskiAleksandra RutkowskaGeneral Court of the EUArkadiusz RadwanLech WałęsaWałęsa v. Polandright to an independent and impartial tribunal established by lawpilot-judgmentDonald Tusk governmentSLAPPscivil lawRadosław Baszuk