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


Journalist at


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 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.



Journalist at



November 10, 2023


Supreme CourtConstitutional TribunalDisciplinary ChamberPolandjudgesdisciplinary proceedingsrule of lawZbigniew ZiobroNational Council of the JudiciaryCourt of Justice of the EUjudicial independenceEuropean CommissionEuropean UnionAndrzej DudaMałgorzata ManowskaCourt of JusticeEuropean Court of Human RightsMinister of JusticeIgor Tuleyadisciplinary systemAdam Bodnarmuzzle lawJarosław KaczyńskiNational Recovery PlanCJEUMateusz MorawieckiCommissioner for Human Rightsneo-judgesCourt of Justice of the European UniondemocracyPrzemysław RadzikWaldemar ŻurekNational Council for Judiciarypresidential electionselectionselections 2023disciplinary commissionercriminal lawJulia PrzyłębskaPiotr SchabKamil Zaradkiewiczmedia freedomharassmentpreliminary rulingsHungarySupreme Administrative Courtelections 2020K 3/21Dagmara Pawełczyk-WoickajudiciaryFirst President of the Supreme CourtŁukasz PiebiakprosecutorsPresidentRecovery FundBeata MorawiecPaweł JuszczyszynProsecutor GeneralMichał Lasotafreedom of expressionMaciej NawackiEuropean Arrest WarrantSejmprosecutionCOVID-19Regional Court in KrakówCriminal ChamberNational ProsecutorConstitutionPrime MinisterMinistry of JusticecourtsMałgorzata GersdorfMarek SafjanEU budgetdisciplinary liability for judgesMaciej FerekOSCEWojciech HermelińskiExtraordinary Control and Public Affairs ChamberIustitiacriminal proceedingsWłodzimierz WróbelVenice Commissionconditionality mechanismAleksander StepkowskiTHEMISLabour and Social Security ChamberStanisław BiernatPiScommission on Russian influenceStanisław PiotrowiczPresident of the Republic of PolandNCJimmunityconditionalityAnna DalkowskaJustice FundcorruptionLaw and JusticeNational Public ProsecutorCouncil of Europefreedom of assemblyKrystian MarkiewiczreformsReczkowicz and Others v. PolandKrzysztof Parchimowiczacting first president of the Supreme Court2017policeSenateAndrzej Zollmedia independenceSLAPPdefamationStrategic Lawsuits Against Public ParticipationLGBTJustice Defence Committee – KOSEwa ŁętowskaDidier ReyndersFreedom HouseAmsterdam District CourtMay 10 2020 electionsXero Flor w Polsce Sp. z o.o. v. PolandOrdo IurisPresident of PolandAndrzej StępkaBroda and Bojara v PolandSylwia Gregorczyk-AbramPiotr GąciarekJarosław WyrembakPM Mateusz MorawieckiArticle 7Next Generation EUConstitutional Tribunal PresidentUrsula von der LeyenLex DudaTVPmediaLex Super OmniaProfessional Liability ChamberreformJarosław DudziczK 7/21National Reconstruction PlansuspensionparliamentChamber of Professional LiabilityEAWArticle 6 ECHRP 7/20Supreme Court PresidentLech GarlickiMichał WawrykiewiczabortionPiotr PrusinowskiNational Electoral Commissionelectoral codeJanusz NiemcewiczTeresa Dębowska-RomanowskaStanisław RymarMałgorzata Pyziak- SzafnickaKazimierz DziałochaBogdan ŚwięczkowskiNetherlandsAndrzej MączyńskiMarek MazurkiewiczvetoStefan JaworskiMirosław GranatOLAFBiruta Lewaszkiewicz-PetrykowskaViktor OrbanJózef IwulskiMaciej MiteraSLAPPsjudcial independenceWojciech ŁączkowskiAdam JamrózPATFoxFerdynand RymarzKonrad WytrykowskiRafał Puchalskismear campaignmilestonesKrakówMarzanna Piekarska-Drążekstate of emergencyUkraineelectoral processBelaruscourt presidentsAdam SynakiewiczXero Flor v. PolandAstradsson v Icelandright to fair trialEdyta BarańskaJoanna Hetnarowicz-SikoraCentral Anti-Corruption BureauJakub IwaniecsurveillancePegasusDariusz DrajewiczJoanna Misztal-KoneckaCivil ChamberK 6/21Wojciech MaczugaSzymon Szynkowski vel SękDariusz ZawistowskiOKO.presselections integrityelections fairnessMarek ZubikBohdan ZdziennickiMirosław WyrzykowskiSławomira Wronkowska-JaśkiewiczPiotr TulejaJerzy StępieńAndrzej RzeplińskitransparencyMariusz KamińskiMaciej Taborowskiinsulting religious feelingsPaweł Filipekpublic mediaMariusz MuszyńskiKrystyna PawłowiczlexTuskcourt changesMarek PietruszyńskiMichał LaskowskiSupreme Audit Officeabuse of state resourcesLaw on the NCJEuropean ParliamentJarosław GowincoronavirusRussiaZuzanna Rudzińska-BluszczFree Courts11 January March in WarsawCCBEPiebiak gatehuman rightsrecommendationC-791/19Human Rights CommissionerMarcin WarchołLGBT ideology free zonesreportEuropean Association of JudgesPiotr Pszczółkowskiretirement agedecommunizationGeneral Assembly of the Supreme Court Judgesintimidation of dissentersdemocratic backslidingpublic opinion pollZiobroEU law primacyMarian BanaśThe Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europecriminal codeBelgiumlex NGOEwa Wrzosekcivil societytransferAdam Tomczyńskimedia pluralismBohdan Bieniek#RecoveryFilesFrans TimmermansLIBE Committeerepairing the rule of lawUS Department of StateMarcin KrajewskiKarolina Miklaszewska2018NGOFull-Scale Election Observation MissionODIHRNations in TransitStanisław ZabłockiPetros TovmasyanJerzy KwaśniewskiPiotr MazurekGrzegorz PudaNational Recovery Plan Monitoring CommitteeWiesław KozielewiczChamber of Extraordinary Control and Public AffairsMałgorzata Dobiecka-WoźniakCouncil of the EURafał LisakMichał DworczykWojciech Sadurskidefamatory statementsRome StatuteInternational Criminal CourtC-619/18Rights and Values Programmejudgepress releaseAntykastalex WoślegislationCourt of Appeal in KrakówPutinismKaczyńskiPaulina AslanowiczJarosław MatrasMałgorzata Wąsek-Wiaderekct on the Protection of the PopulatioWorld Justice Project awardStanisław ZdunIrena BochniakKrystyna Morawa-FryźlewiczŁukasz BilińskiIvan MischenkoJoanna Kołodziej-MichałowiczMonika FrąckowiakArkadiusz CichockiEmilia SzmydtTomasz SzmydtE-mail scandalAndrzej SkowronKasta/AntykastaKatarzyna Chmuraadvocate generalGrzegorz FurmankiewiczMarek JaskulskiEwa ŁąpińskaZbigniew ŁupinaPaweł StyrnaSwieczkowskiDworczyk leaksMałgorzata FroncHater ScandalAleksandra RutkowskaGeneral Court of the EUArkadiusz RadwanLech WałęsaWałęsa v. Polandright to an independent and impartial tribunal established by lawpilot-judgmentDonald Tusk governmentRafał WojciechowskiDobrochna Bach-Goleckalex RaczkowskiPiotr Raczkowskithe Spy ActdisinformationCT Presidentfundamental rightsNational Broadcasting Councilelection fairnessequal treatmentcivil lawMarcin MatczakDariusz KornelukNational School of Judiciary and Public Prosecution (KSSiP)codification commissiondelegationsWatchdog PolskaDariusz BarskiLasotapopulismState TribunalRadosław BaszukAction PlanJustice MinistryVěra JourováDonald Tuskjustice system reformAnti-SLAPP Directiveinsultgag lawsuitsstrategic investmentinvestmentlustrationJakub KwiecińskidiscriminationAct on the Supreme Courtelectoral commissionsEuropean Court of HuKrzysztof RączkaPoznańTomasz Koszewskitest of independenceSebastian MazurekElżbieta Jabłońska-MalikJoanna Scheuring-WielgusoppositionThe National Centre for Research and DevelopmentAdam Gendźwiłłtransitional justiceDariusz DończykKoan LenaertsKarol WeitzZbigniew KapińskiAnna GłowackaCourt of Appeal in WarsawOsiatyński'a ArchiveEUUS State DepartmentAssessment Actenvironmentextraordinary commissionWhite PaperKaspryszyn v PolandNCR&DNCBiREuropean Anti-Fraud Office OLAFJustyna WydrzyńskaAgnieszka Brygidyr-DoroszJoanna KnobelCrimes of espionageJędrzej Dessoulavy-ŚliwińskiMarek Piertuszyńskihate speechhate crimesmedia taxadvertising taxmediabezwyboruJacek KurskiKESMAIndex.huGrzęda v PolandŻurek v PolandPrzemysław CzarnekJacek CzaputowiczMarcin RomanowskiElżbieta KarskaPrzemysła Radzikmedia lawRafał TrzaskowskiSobczyńska and Others v PolandTelex.huJelenForum shoppingFirst President of the Suprme CourtEuropean Economic and Social CommitteeSebastian KaletaOrganization of Security and Co-operation in EuropeC-156/21C-157/21foreign agents lawArticle 2Rome IIJózsef SzájerChamber of Extraordinary VerificationKlubrádióequalityGazeta WyborczaLGBT free zonesPollitykaBrussels Ilegislative practiceENAZbigniew BoniekAK judgmentautocratizationMultiannual Financial FrameworkOpenbaar MinisterieRegional Court in Amsterdamabortion rulingArticle 10 ECHRprotestsinterim measuresLeszek MazurIrena MajcherAmsterdamLMmutual trustthe Regional Court in Warsawpublic broadcasterUnited NationsForum Współpracy Sędziówthe NetherlandsDenmarkact on misdemeanoursCivil Service ActParliamentary Assembly of the Council of EuropeNorwegian Ministry of Foreign AffairsNorwegian fundsNorwayKraśnikOmbudsmanKarlsruheAusl 301 AR 104/19SwedenFinlandMariusz KrasońC-487/19GermanyCelmerC354/20 PPUC412/20 PPUIrelandMarek AstLSOright to protestSławomir JęksaWiktor JoachimkowskiRoman Giertychtrans-Atlantic valuesMichał WośMinistry of FinancelawyersMirosław Wróblewskirepressive actborderprimacyEU treatiesAgnieszka Niklas-BibikSłupsk Regional CourtMaciej RutkiewiczAct of 20 December 2019Amnesty InternationalJacek SasinEvgeni TanchevKochenovPechPaulina Kieszkowska-KnapikMaria Ejchart-DuboisAgreement for the Rule of LawPorozumienie dla PraworządnościAct sanitising the judiciaryFreedom in the WorldECJErnest BejdaThe First President of the Supreme CourtMaciej CzajkaMariusz JałoszewskiŁukasz RadkepolexitFrackowiakDolińska-Ficek and Ozimek v PolandRzeszówKoen LenaertsharrassmentOlimpia Barańska-Małuszeinfringment actionHudocPKWKonrad SzymańskiPiotr BogdanowiczPiotr BurasLeon KieresIpsosEU valuesNational Prosecutor’s OfficeBogdan ŚwiączkowskiDisicplinary ChamberTribunal of StateOlsztyn courtPrzemysła CzarnekEducation MinisterENCJauthoritarian equilibriumArticle 258postal voteTVNjournalistslexTVNEwa MaciejewskaGerard BirgfellerPolish mediaAlina CzubieniakSimpson judgmentpostal vote billclientelismoligarchic systemEuropean Public Prosecutor's Officeresolution of 23 January 2020Polish National FoundationLux VeritatisMałgorzata BednarekPiotr WawrzykIsrael