The government approved a Polish candidate to the office of judge of the CJEU

Share

Journalist at OKO.press.

More

The PiS government has been trying to select a candidate for the position of judge of the Court of Justice of the EU for two years. The lost election accelerated the matter and the inter-ministerial group nominated Dr Hab. Dobrochna Bach-Golecka, a lawyer and theologian



On Tuesday7 November, the Council of Ministers approved Dr Hab. Dobrochna Bach-Golecka, professor of the University of Warsaw, as the candidate recommended for the position of judge of the Court of Justice of the European Union. 

 

The Court has 27 judges, one from each EU country. They are appointed with the consent of the governments of the Member States after consulting an expert advisory panel, which is required by Article 255 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. 

 

Article 253 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU and Article 19 of the Treaty on European Union state that the judges of the CJEU should have the qualifications required for the highest judicial office in their respective countries or be recognized legal experts. There must be no doubt as to their independence.

 

The government also approved Aleksandra Rutkowska, Judge of the Regional Court in Warsaw, to which she was promoted in 2021, and Dr hab. Arkadiusz Radwan, professor of the Vytautas Magnus University in Kaunas to judicial positions in the General Court of the European Union.

 

 

PiS has been trying to select a candidate for two years

 

The CJEU judge from Poland is currently Professor Marek Safjan, whose 6-year term of office ended in October 2021. The procedure introduced by the government in which applications of lawyers are assessed by the Inter-Ministerial Group for selecting candidates to the office of judge and attorneys general of the CJEU, as well as judges of the General Court of the EU started to apply in that same year. The group is chaired by a member of the government, the European Union minister, and includes a representative of the EU minister, two representatives of the justice minister and a representative of the head of the prime minister’s chancellery.

 

The competition was held for the first time in 2021. The winner selected by the group then was Dr Hab. Rafał Wojciechowski, a judge of Julia Przyłębska’s Constitutional Tribunal, who was selected for the position by the PiS majority in the Sejm. Wojciechowski took part in issuing the ruling of 7 October 2021, which undermined the key principle of functioning of the EU – the primacy of EU law over national law. This decision, referred to as the ‘legal Polexit’, was one of the reasons for the inclusion of the milestone regarding the judiciary in Poland’s NRRP and became one of the grounds for the European Commission’s action against Poland in connection with the functioning of the Constitutional Tribunal.

 

In March 2022, Ewa Siedlecka, Polityka magazine legal columnist, disclosed that the panel of experts at the Court of Justice of the European Union had rejected Wojciechowski’s candidacy. In accordance with the procedure, the Member States vote after the opinion is issued. However, this did not happen, which meant that the government or the interested party himself had to withdraw at some stage.

Manage before the change of government

 

All was quiet about the competition for many months. The announcement of the recruitment appeared as late as in June 2023. The deadline for application was 3 July. However, matters really accelerated after PiS lost the elections.

 

The list of candidates who satisfied the formal requirements was published on 3 November. This was the day on which the inter-ministerial group planned to hold interviews. The selected six were:

 

  • Dr Hab. Dobrochna Bach-Golecka, Professor of the University of Warsaw, 
  • Dr Hab. Agnieszka Frąckowiak-Adamska, professor of the University of Wrocław, 
  • Dr Hab. Tomasz Tadeusz Koncewicz, professor of the University of Gdańsk, attorney-at-law, 
  • Dr Hab. Arkadiusz Radwan, professor Vytautas Magnus University in Kaunas, attorney-at-law; 
  • Dr Hab. Joanna Wegner, professor of the University of Łódź, judge of the Supreme Administrative Court; 
  • Mariusz Witkowski, judge of the Regional Court in Katowice. 

 

The interviews lasted approximately 20–30 minutes. They started with a brief presentation of the reasons for applying, after which the committee asked three questions. What interested it? Among other things, the relationship between national and international law and matters of priority of EU law.

 

Who is the candidate?

Dr Hab. Dobrochna Bach-Golecka, who was recommended by the outgoing Council of Ministers, graduated in law from the University of Gdańsk, as well as in theology from the John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin. She has been lecturing at the University of Warsaw for years, where she has been a university professor since 2020 and has worked in the European Law Department since 2005. She has been the head of the Centre for Canon Law since 2019.

 

She has worked with Ordo Iuris on various occasions over the past decade – she has taken part in conferences organized by the institute (e.g. on abortion) and in its publications. She was one of the experts preparing a report on the Convention of the Council of Europe on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence in 2014. Its conclusions boiled down to the fact that its ratification by Poland is ‘inadvisable’ because it ‘may serve to exert pressure to legalize abortion’, ‘it introduces discrimination against men’ and ‘it opens the door to questioning the constitutionally protected model of the family’.

 

She was appointed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to the post of ad hoc judge of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg in 2016–2018. In the following years, she held advisory positions at the Chancellery of the Polish Senate (but only the Senate of the ninth term of office), the Ministry of Science and Higher Education and the Ministry of Health.

 

What next?

The selection of the candidate by the ministerial group does not yet mean that she will become a judge of the CJEU. The person nominated by the government must receive a positive opinion of a panel of experts appointed under the Treaty on European Union, after which the governments of the Member States of the EU, including the (new) Polish government have to agree. But this is not the only obstacle to taking up office.

 

This is because a so-called Competence Act entered into force in August 2023, which requires the government to present candidacies for the top positions in the EU, including the position of judge of the CJEU, to the president. It can be expected that Dr Hab. Bach-Golecka will be accepted by Andrzej Duda – she was one of two lawyers who the president invited to the presidential palace in June 2022 to discuss the reform of the Polish judiciary, which is a distinction.

 

However, if the lawyer does not receive a recommendation from the panel of experts, the next candidate or candidates will have to be selected by the new government in consultation with the president.

 

Judges of the General Court of the EU 

 

The Council of Ministers also approved two candidates to judicial positions in the General Court of the European Union (the part of the CJEU in which complaints of private individuals against EU institutions are considered) on Tuesday.

 

They are Aleksandra Rutkowska, Judge of the Regional Court in Warsaw, to which she was promoted in 2021, and Dr hab. Arkadiusz Radwan, professor of the Vytautas Magnus University in Kaunas.

 

The candidates to the positions of Judges of the General Court of the EU are also ultimately nominated with the joint agreement of the governments of the Member States after the committee gives its opinion.

 

 

The article was originally published in Polish in OKO.press. Translated by Roman Wojtasz.

 

The activities of the organization are supported with the assistance of the Active Citizens Fund – National Program, which is financed by Iceland, Liechtenstein, and Norway through the Norwegian and EEA Funds.

 



Author


Journalist at OKO.press.


More

Published

November 10, 2023

Tags

Supreme CourtPolandConstitutional TribunalDisciplinary Chamberjudgesrule of lawdisciplinary proceedingsZbigniew ZiobroNational Council of the Judiciaryjudicial independenceCourt of Justice of the EUEuropean CommissionEuropean UnionAndrzej DudaMałgorzata ManowskaCourt of JusticeMinister of JusticeEuropean Court of Human RightsAdam BodnarIgor Tuleyadisciplinary systemneo-judgesmuzzle lawCJEUJarosław KaczyńskiNational Recovery PlanMateusz MorawieckiCommissioner for Human RightsWaldemar ŻurekCourt of Justice of the European UnionNational Council for JudiciaryPrzemysław RadzikdemocracyPiotr Schabjudiciarypresidential electionselectionscriminal lawKamil Zaradkiewiczelections 2023disciplinary commissionermedia freedomJulia PrzyłębskaK 3/21First President of the Supreme Courtelections 2020harassmentSupreme Administrative Courtpreliminary rulingsDagmara Pawełczyk-WoickaprosecutionHungaryMichał LasotaprosecutorsBeata MorawiecRecovery FundPresidentProsecutor GeneralPaweł JuszczyszynNational ProsecutorŁukasz PiebiakConstitutionEuropean Arrest WarrantPrime Ministerfreedom of expressionMaciej NawackiCOVID-19Marek SafjanVenice CommissionSejmimmunityCriminal ChamberRegional Court in KrakówIustitiaMaciej FerekMałgorzata GersdorfreformMinistry of JusticeNCJExtraordinary Control and Public Affairs ChamberOSCEcourtsWojciech Hermelińskidisciplinary liability for judgesEU budgetcorruptionStanisław PiotrowiczNational Public Prosecutorcriminal proceedingsCouncil of EuropeAnna DalkowskaLGBTJustice FundPresident of the Republic of PolandWłodzimierz Wróbelconditionality mechanismTHEMISKrystian MarkiewiczAleksander StepkowskiStanisław BiernatPiSreformsLaw and Justicecommission on Russian influenceLabour and Social Security ChamberJarosław Dudziczconditionalityfreedom of assemblyPresident of PolandChamber of Professional LiabilityOrdo Iurismedia independenceDidier ReyndersReczkowicz and Others v. PolandSLAPPStrategic Lawsuits Against Public ParticipationBroda and Bojara v PolandXero Flor w Polsce Sp. z o.o. v. PolandChamber of Extraordinary Control and Public AffairsSupreme Court PresidentMarcin Romanowskielectoral codeAndrzej StępkaArticle 7Piotr PrusinowskiSenateSylwia Gregorczyk-AbramParliamentary Assembly of the Council of EuropeTVPmediaLech GarlickiLex Super OmniapoliceabortionNext Generation EUUrsula von der LeyenEAWJustice Defence Committee – KOSAmsterdam District CourtdefamationKrzysztof ParchimowiczFreedom HouseMichał WawrykiewiczEwa ŁętowskaArticle 6 ECHRMay 10 2020 elections2017Piotr GąciarekPegasussuspensionP 7/20acting first president of the Supreme CourtNational Electoral CommissionK 7/21PM Mateusz MorawieckiAndrzej ZollJarosław WyrembakLex DudaProfessional Liability ChamberCivil Chamberparliamentcivil societyNational Reconstruction PlanConstitutional Tribunal PresidentAdam JamrózStefan JaworskiJoanna Hetnarowicz-SikoraKrakówBiruta Lewaszkiewicz-PetrykowskaStanisław RymarMałgorzata Pyziak- SzafnickaJanusz NiemcewiczAndrzej MączyńskiMarek MazurkiewiczAdam Synakiewiczstate of emergencyWojciech ŁączkowskiEdyta BarańskaMirosław GranatKazimierz DziałochaJoanna Misztal-Koneckajudcial independenceMaciej MiteraDariusz KornelukViktor OrbanOLAFrestoration of the rule of lawvetoMariusz KamińskisurveillanceK 6/21Józef IwulskiAstradsson v IcelandCentral Anti-Corruption BureauPATFoxSLAPPsTeresa Dębowska-RomanowskaaccountabilityUkraineKrystyna PawłowiczRafał PuchalskitransparencyDariusz ZawistowskiOKO.pressright to fair trialDariusz DrajewiczPaweł FilipekMaciej Taborowskismear campaigninsulting religious feelingsNational Prosecutor’s OfficeMariusz MuszyńskiBelaruselectoral processcourt presidentsMarzanna Piekarska-DrążekmilestonesWojciech MaczugaMichał LaskowskiMarian BanaśJakub IwaniecSławomira Wronkowska-JaśkiewiczPiotr TulejaJerzy Stępieńelections fairnessAndrzej RzeplińskiSzymon Szynkowski vel SękFerdynand RymarzInternational Criminal CourtMarek PietruszyńskiMirosław WyrzykowskiBohdan ZdziennickiXero Flor v. Polandpublic mediaSupreme Audit OfficelexTuskcourt changeselections integrityMarek ZubikKonrad Wytrykowskiabuse of state resourcesGeneral Assembly of the Supreme Court JudgesEuropean ParliamentZuzanna Rudzińska-BluszczMarcin Warchoł11 January March in WarsawEuropean Association of JudgesZiobroFree CourtsdecommunizationEwa WrzosekEU law primacyhuman rightsPiebiak gaterecommendationreportLaw on the NCJlex NGORussiaCCBEpublic opinion pollHuman Rights CommissionerJarosław GowinPiotr PszczółkowskiLGBT ideology free zonesC-791/19coronaviruscriminal coderetirement ageNetherlandsAdam Tomczyńskidemocratic backslidingintimidation of dissentersThe Council of Bars and Law Societies of EuropeBogdan ŚwięczkowskitransferBelgiumJoanna Scheuring-WielgusNations in TransitCouncil of the EUElżbieta Jabłońska-MalikKatarzyna ChmuraSebastian MazurekJędrzej Dessoulavy-ŚliwińskiLIBE Committeedefamatory statementsMałgorzata FroncRafał LisakKarolina MiklaszewskaNGOKrystyna Morawa-FryźlewiczIrena BochniakoppositionEuropean Court of Huelectoral commissionsAct on the Supreme CourtdiscriminationJakub KwiecińskiWorld Justice Project awardTomasz Koszewskitest of independenceDariusz DończykGrzegorz FurmankiewiczAntykastaStanisław ZdunAdam Gendźwiłł2018Wojciech SadurskiFull-Scale Election Observation MissionODIHRMarek Jaskulskirepairing the rule of lawadvocate generalpress release#RecoveryFilesmedia pluralismMichał DworczykDworczyk leaksE-mail scandalAndrzej SkowronRights and Values ProgrammeTomasz SzmydtŁukasz BilińskiIvan MischenkoMonika FrąckowiakEmilia SzmydtSwieczkowskiKasta/AntykastaBohdan BieniekStanisław ZabłockiJoanna Kołodziej-MichałowiczPetros TovmasyanJerzy KwaśniewskiPiotr MazurekGrzegorz PudaNational Recovery Plan Monitoring CommitteeWiesław KozielewiczFrans TimmermansMałgorzata Dobiecka-WoźniakUS Department of StateMarcin KrajewskiEwa ŁąpińskaZbigniew ŁupinaPaweł StyrnaC-619/18Arkadiusz CichockiCT PresidentMarcin Matczakequal treatmentNational School of Judiciary and Public Prosecution (KSSiP)codification commissiondelegationsWatchdog PolskaDariusz BarskiLasotafundamental rightsState Tribunalinsultcivil lawRadosław BaszukAction PlanJustice MinistryVěra JourováDonald Tuskjustice system reformAnti-SLAPP DirectiveHater ScandalpopulismNational Council for the Judiciarycivil partnerships billKRSJudicial Reformsmigration strategyPenal CodeLGBTQ+NIKProfetosame-sex unionsKatarzyna Kotulacivil partnershipsHelsinki Foundation for Human RightsPiotr HofmańskiC‑718/21preliminary referenceEU lawethicsChamber of Professional ResponsibilityThe Codification Committee of Civil LawInvestigationPoznańKrzysztof Rączkaextraordinary commissionZbigniew KapińskiAnna GłowackaCourt of Appeal in WarsawOsiatyński'a Archivetransitional justiceUS State DepartmentAssessment ActCrimes of espionageJoanna KnobelAgnieszka Brygidyr-DoroszKoan LenaertsKarol WeitzKaspryszyn v PolandNCR&DNCBiRThe National Centre for Research and DevelopmentEuropean Anti-Fraud Office OLAFJustyna Wydrzyńskaenvironmentinvestmentstrategic investmentRafał WojciechowskiAleksandra RutkowskaGeneral Court of the EUArkadiusz RadwanLech WałęsaWałęsa v. Polandright to an independent and impartial tribunal established by lawpilot-judgmentDobrochna Bach-Goleckaelection fairnessNational Broadcasting Councilgag lawsuitslex RaczkowskiPiotr Raczkowskithe Spy ActdisinformationlustrationWhite PaperEUDonald Tusk governmentjudgePrzemysław CzarnekJózsef SzájerRafał TrzaskowskiKlubrádióSobczyńska and Others v PolandŻurek v PolandGazeta WyborczaGrzęda v PolandPollitykaJelenmedia lawIndex.huJacek CzaputowiczElżbieta KarskaPrzemysła Radzikmedia taxadvertising taxmediabezwyboruJacek KurskiKESMABrussels IRome IILGBT free zonesFirst President of the Suprme CourtBogdan ŚwiączkowskiDisicplinary ChamberTribunal of StateOrganization of Security and Co-operation in EuropeOlsztyn courtPrzemysła CzarnekequalityMarek PiertuszyńskiChamber of Extraordinary VerificationArticle 2Forum shoppinghate speechEuropean Economic and Social CommitteeSebastian Kaletahate crimesC-156/21C-157/21Education Ministerthe Regional Court in Warsawproteststhe NetherlandsDenmarkSwedenFinlandMariusz KrasońGermanyCelmermutual trustabortion rulingLMUnited NationsLeszek MazurAmsterdamIrena Majcherinterim measuresIrelandautocratizationMultiannual Financial FrameworkC354/20 PPUC412/20 PPUC-487/19Norwegian Ministry of Foreign AffairsNorwegian fundsNorwayKraśnikOmbudsmanZbigniew BoniekENAArticle 10 ECHRRegional Court in AmsterdamOpenbaar MinisterieAusl 301 AR 104/19Karlsruheact on misdemeanoursCivil Service Actpublic broadcasterForum Współpracy SędziówSimpson judgmentAK judgmentlegislative practiceforeign agents lawrepressive actMaciej CzajkaMariusz JałoszewskiŁukasz RadkepolexitLSOtrans-Atlantic valuesDolińska-Ficek and Ozimek v PolandAmnesty InternationalThe First President of the Supreme CourtErnest BejdaJacek Sasinright to protestSławomir JęksaWiktor JoachimkowskiRoman GiertychAct of 20 December 2019Michał WośMinistry of FinancelawyersFrackowiakPaulina Kieszkowska-KnapikKochenovPaulina AslanowiczJarosław MatrasMałgorzata Wąsek-Wiaderekct on the Protection of the PopulatioPechlegislationlex WośKaczyńskiPutinismCourt of Appeal in KrakówMaria Ejchart-DuboisAgreement for the Rule of LawPorozumienie dla PraworządnościAct sanitising the judiciaryECJMarek AstFreedom in the WorldEvgeni TanchevRome StatuteIsraelEuropean Public Prosecutor's OfficeEU valuesPolish National FoundationLux Veritatisinfringment actionMałgorzata BednarekPiotr WawrzykPKWENCJoligarchic systemclientelismIpsosOlimpia Barańska-MałuszeHudocKonrad SzymańskiPiotr BogdanowiczPiotr Burasauthoritarian equilibriumArticle 258Leon Kieresresolution of 23 January 2020Telex.huEU treatiesAgnieszka Niklas-BibikSłupsk Regional CourtAlina CzubieniakMaciej RutkiewiczharrassmentMirosław WróblewskiprimacyborderGerard BirgfellerTVNjournalistslexTVNpostal vote billPolish mediapostal voteEwa MaciejewskaRzeszówKoen Lenaerts