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 JudiciaryCourt of Justice of the EUjudicial independenceEuropean CommissionEuropean UnionAndrzej DudaMałgorzata ManowskaCourt of JusticeMinister of JusticeEuropean Court of Human RightsAdam BodnarIgor Tuleyadisciplinary systemmuzzle lawJarosław KaczyńskiNational Recovery PlanCJEUMateusz Morawieckineo-judgesCommissioner for Human RightsCourt of Justice of the European UnionPrzemysław RadzikWaldemar ŻurekdemocracyNational Council for JudiciaryPiotr Schabelectionspresidential electionsKamil ZaradkiewiczJulia Przyłębskamedia freedomcriminal lawelections 2023disciplinary commissionerharassmentprosecutionSupreme Administrative CourtHungaryelections 2020preliminary rulingsjudiciaryDagmara Pawełczyk-WoickaK 3/21First President of the Supreme CourtPaweł JuszczyszynNational ProsecutorRecovery FundPresidentMichał LasotaProsecutor GeneralŁukasz PiebiakBeata MorawiecprosecutorsEuropean Arrest Warrantfreedom of expressionConstitutionPrime MinisterSejmimmunityMaciej NawackiIustitiaRegional Court in KrakówCriminal ChamberCOVID-19Maciej FerekOSCEMałgorzata GersdorfcourtsVenice CommissionMarek SafjanMinistry of JusticeExtraordinary Control and Public Affairs ChamberEU budgetdisciplinary liability for judgesWojciech HermelińskiPiSNCJKrystian MarkiewiczStanisław PiotrowiczPresident of the Republic of PolandAleksander Stepkowskicommission on Russian influenceJustice FundTHEMISLabour and Social Security ChamberLaw and JusticeNational Public ProsecutorCouncil of Europecriminal proceedingsconditionalitycorruptionStanisław BiernatreformsAnna Dalkowskafreedom of assemblyconditionality mechanismWłodzimierz WróbelsuspensionPiotr GąciarekOrdo IurisReczkowicz and Others v. PolandparliamentMarcin RomanowskiAndrzej Stępkamedia independenceChamber of Professional LiabilityBroda and Bojara v PolandXero Flor w Polsce Sp. z o.o. v. PolandP 7/20K 7/21LGBTPresident of PolandNational Reconstruction PlanJarosław DudziczLex DudaProfessional Liability ChamberMay 10 2020 electionsStrategic Lawsuits Against Public ParticipationPiotr PrusinowskidefamationLex Super OmniamediaUrsula von der LeyenKrzysztof ParchimowiczEAWabortionMichał Wawrykiewiczelectoral codeAmsterdam District CourtNext Generation EUSLAPPConstitutional Tribunal PresidentDidier ReyndersTVPEwa ŁętowskaSenateParliamentary Assembly of the Council of EuropeLech GarlickiSylwia Gregorczyk-AbramArticle 6 ECHRAndrzej ZollNational Electoral CommissionFreedom HouseJarosław WyrembakJustice Defence Committee – KOSreformArticle 7acting first president of the Supreme CourtSupreme Court President2017PM Mateusz MorawieckipolicePiotr TulejaJerzy StępieńAndrzej RzeplińskiFerdynand RymarzStanisław RymarMałgorzata Pyziak- SzafnickaDariusz ZawistowskiOKO.pressreportSławomira Wronkowska-JaśkiewiczMirosław WyrzykowskiMarek ZubikDariusz KornelukMarzanna Piekarska-DrążekEuropean Parliamentmilestoneselectoral processAndrzej MączyńskiJózef IwulskiWojciech MaczugavetoOLAFViktor OrbanSzymon Szynkowski vel SękMaciej Miterajudcial independencecourt presidentsJanusz NiemcewiczTeresa Dębowska-RomanowskaMarek MazurkiewiczZiobroMirosław GranatWojciech ŁączkowskiBiruta Lewaszkiewicz-PetrykowskaStefan JaworskiAdam JamrózKazimierz Działochainsulting religious feelingsrestoration of the rule of lawright to fair trialXero Flor v. PolandLaw on the NCJKrakówstate of emergencydecommunizationBelarusAdam SynakiewiczAstradsson v IcelandK 6/21Joanna Hetnarowicz-SikoraCentral Anti-Corruption BureausurveillanceMariusz KamińskiPegasusEdyta BarańskaJoanna Misztal-KoneckaCivil ChamberUkraineSupreme Audit OfficeMarian BanaśKrystyna PawłowiczCCBERafał PuchalskiThe Council of Bars and Law Societies of EuropeMarek PietruszyńskiMichał Laskowskipublic opinion pollsmear campaignMariusz MuszyńskiHuman Rights CommissionerMaciej TaborowskiPaweł FilipekInternational Criminal CourtKonrad WytrykowskirecommendationaccountabilityJakub IwaniecDariusz DrajewicztransparencyFree CourtsBohdan Zdziennickiretirement ageSLAPPsPATFoxLGBT ideology free zoneslexTuskAdam Tomczyński11 January March in Warsawabuse of state resourcesEuropean Association of Judgespublic mediaEwa Wrzosekcourt changesC-791/19democratic backslidingcoronavirushuman rightscriminal codePiebiak gateelections fairnessZuzanna Rudzińska-BluszczJarosław GowinEU law primacyPiotr PszczółkowskiBelgiumtransferNetherlandscivil societyRussiaBogdan Święczkowskielections integrityintimidation of dissentersMarcin Warchołlex NGOGeneral Assembly of the Supreme Court JudgesAgnieszka Brygidyr-DoroszCrimes of espionageNCBiRJoanna KnobelKasta/AntykastaThe National Centre for Research and DevelopmentHater ScandalPaweł StyrnaGrzegorz FurmankiewiczDariusz BarskiJoanna Kołodziej-MichałowiczJustyna WydrzyńskaKrystyna Morawa-FryźlewiczEwa ŁąpińskaIrena BochniakZbigniew ŁupinaNational Broadcasting CouncilKatarzyna ChmuraStanisław ZdunLasotaAntykastaEuropean Anti-Fraud Office OLAFMarek JaskulskiRome StatuteCourt of Appeal in Warsawlex RaczkowskiCourt of Appeal in KrakówNational Council for the JudiciaryMarek Astgag lawsuitsAssessment ActAct sanitising the judiciaryenvironmentPorozumienie dla PraworządnościAgreement for the Rule of LawMaria Ejchart-DuboisPaulina Kieszkowska-Knapikstrategic investmentPiotr HofmańskiUS State DepartmentPutinismKaczyńskilex Wośdisinformationextraordinary commissionlegislationthe Spy ActZbigniew KapińskiAnna GłowackaHelsinki Foundation for Human RightsinvestmentMałgorzata Wąsek-WiaderekOsiatyński'a ArchiveJarosław MatrasPaulina AslanowiczPiotr Raczkowskict on the Protection of the PopulatioAndrzej SkowronoppositionDariusz DończykPetros TovmasyanJerzy KwaśniewskiPiotr MazurekGrzegorz PudaNational Recovery Plan Monitoring CommitteeinsultState TribunalDonald Tusk governmenttest of independencepilot-judgmentVěra JourováTomasz Koszewskiright to an independent and impartial tribunal established by lawJakub KwiecińskidiscriminationAnti-SLAPP DirectiveODIHRcivil lawDonald TuskJustice MinistryJoanna Scheuring-WielgusAction PlanAdam GendźwiłłElżbieta Jabłońska-MalikSebastian Mazurekjustice system reformJędrzej Dessoulavy-ŚliwińskiEuropean Court of HuMałgorzata FroncRafał LisakKarolina MiklaszewskaRadosław BaszukNGOFull-Scale Election Observation MissionWałęsa v. PolandAct on the Supreme CourtLech WałęsaMichał DworczykDworczyk leaksAleksandra RutkowskaE-mail scandalRafał WojciechowskidelegationsTomasz SzmydtEmilia SzmydtWatchdog PolskaArkadiusz CichockiKaspryszyn v PolandDobrochna Bach-GoleckaMonika FrąckowiakNCR&Delection fairnessIvan Mischenkomedia pluralism#RecoveryFilesWiesław Kozielewiczelectoral commissionsMarcin MatczakChamber of Extraordinary Control and Public AffairsMałgorzata Dobiecka-WoźniakArkadiusz RadwanMarcin KrajewskiBohdan BieniekGeneral Court of the EUKrzysztof Rączkarepairing the rule of lawPoznańNational School of Judiciary and Public Prosecution (KSSiP)Koan Lenaertscodification commissionKarol WeitzŁukasz BilińskiPKWhate speechGrzęda v PolandŻurek v PolandSobczyńska and Others v PolandRafał Trzaskowskimedia lawPrzemysła RadzikElżbieta KarskaJacek Czaputowiczhate crimesChamber of Extraordinary Verificationinfringment actionEU valuesENCJIsraelforeign agents lawOrganization of Security and Co-operation in EuropeFirst President of the Suprme CourtLGBT free zonesequalityPrzemysław Czarneklegislative practiceAK judgmentSimpson judgmentpublic broadcastermutual trustLMIrelandIrena MajcherAmsterdamthe Regional Court in WarsawOpenbaar MinisterieRegional Court in AmsterdamENAZbigniew BoniekOmbudsmanKraśnikNorwayNorwegian fundsNorwegian Ministry of Foreign AffairsC-487/19Article 10 ECHRUnited NationsLeon KierespopulismLIBE CommitteeFrans TimmermansUS Department of StateSwieczkowskiadvocate generalpress releaseRights and Values ProgrammeC-619/18defamatory statementsStanisław ZabłockiCouncil of the EUequal treatmentfundamental rightsCT PresidentEUWhite Paperlustrationtransitional justice2018Nations in TransitWorld Justice Project awardWojciech SadurskiAct of 20 December 2019repressive actKoen LenaertsharrassmentAlina CzubieniakGerard BirgfellerEwa Maciejewskapostal votepostal vote billlawyersLSOjudgePechKochenovEvgeni TanchevFreedom in the WorldECJFrackowiakAmnesty Internationaltrans-Atlantic valuesresolution of 23 January 2020Olsztyn courtoligarchic systemEuropean Public Prosecutor's OfficePolish National FoundationLux VeritatisMałgorzata BednarekPiotr WawrzykTVNjournalistslexTVNclientelismArticle 258Przemysła CzarnekEducation MinisterIpsosOlimpia Barańska-MałuszeHudocKonrad SzymańskiPiotr BogdanowiczPiotr Burasauthoritarian equilibriumPolish mediaRzeszówMichał WośMinistry of FinanceJacek SasinErnest BejdaThe First President of the Supreme CourtMaciej CzajkaMariusz JałoszewskiŁukasz RadkepolexitRoman GiertychWiktor JoachimkowskiborderprimacyEU treatiesAgnieszka Niklas-BibikSłupsk Regional CourtMaciej RutkiewiczMirosław Wróblewskiright to protestSławomir JęksaDolińska-Ficek and Ozimek v PolandTribunal of StateLeszek MazurCelmerC354/20 PPUC412/20 PPUAusl 301 AR 104/19Karlsruheact on misdemeanoursCivil Service ActForum Współpracy Sędziówmedia taxGermanyMariusz Krasońinterim measuresautocratizationMultiannual Financial Frameworkabortion rulingproteststhe NetherlandsDenmarkSwedenFinlandadvertising taxmediabezwyboruArticle 2Forum shoppingEuropean Economic and Social CommitteeSebastian KaletaC-156/21C-157/21Marek PiertuszyńskiNational Prosecutor’s OfficeBogdan ŚwiączkowskiRome IIBrussels IJacek KurskiKESMAIndex.huTelex.huJelenJózsef SzájerKlubrádióGazeta WyborczaPollitykaDisicplinary Chamber