Thread by @ProfPech

Speaking of unlawful puppet body known as Poland's "Disciplinary Chamber" & its unlawful "decision" to void ECJ AK ruling, this development was mentioned for 1st time at ECJ level by AG Tanchev in his Opinion of 17 Dec 2020 in C-824/18

curia.europa.eu/juris/document…

cc @RULEOFLAWpl

https://twitter.com/ProfPech/status/1340223655620599809

@RULEOFLAWpl This is an important AG opinion which also for the 1st time mentions *and* makes use of Poland's Supreme Court resolution of 23 January 2020 which held the bogus "DC" not to constitute a court

On this resolution see my @reconnectEU post and paper

reconnect-europe.eu/blog/dealing-w…

@RULEOFLAWpl @reconnectEU Another "1st" at ECJ level: reference to lack of effective constitutional review in Poland but AG is still too diplomatic here as EU Comm, EU Parliament & CoE Parliament have been explicit about total lack of effective review + unlawful composition of CT

rechtersvoorrechters.nl/third-party-in…

@RULEOFLAWpl @reconnectEU Yet another "1st" (TBOMK): Polish legislature is explicitly accused of having *repeatedly* violated principle of loyal cooperation by *repeatedly* seeking to sabotage pending infringement actions & preliminary references

Cannot think of similar/correct accusation being made ever

@RULEOFLAWpl @reconnectEU Similarly unprecedented & yet sadly correct assessment by AG: While expressed diplomatically, the AG here stresses the collusion between the "Constitutional Tribunal" and the Sejm (both of which have just become the playthings of Supreme Leader Kaczyński) to destroy #ruleoflaw

@RULEOFLAWpl @reconnectEU Lastly (it's Saturday after all), AG interestingly and correctly notes, albeit again diplomatically, unlawful behaviour of Polish President/nature of individual appointments to Supreme Court & refers to them as candidates picked because they were the "politically convenient ones"

IMO AG Opinion should have refrained from referring to these individuals as "judges" (they're "usurpers"). More crucially opinion should have engaged with "established by law" rather than focusing on judicial independence. That said, this is a serious, compelling opinion.

(end)