Thread by @ProfPech

#RuleofLaw breakdown in #Poland: Just finished reading this very welcome/important judgment in Case C‑824/18 which however won’t decisively halt deliberate organised-crime type destruction of judicial independence due to inherent limits of ECJ jurisdiction in PR case (Thread)

https://twitter.com/EUCourtPress/status/1366678262181748736

1/ This limitation notwithstanding, judgment is extremely welcome as strongest confirmation to date that EUMS must respect EU Law in particular when it comes to "enactment of national rules governing the process of appointing judges” + connected rules governing judicial review

2/ ECJ essentially makes clear (but TBC by referring court) that Polish authorities have violated EU law by adopting legislative amendments with *deliberate/systemic* aim of *preventing the ECJ* from ruling on questions referred to it by (not yet captured) PL Supreme Admin Court

3/ Particularly worth noting and positive is holistic framework of analysis employed by Court re KRS/(illegal) appointments and finding that Polish legislature has deliberately aimed to violate rule of law + use of notion of “retrograde impact” (1st time I have seen notion used)

4/ First time TBOMK ECJ denounces lawless behaviour of Polish authorities & their violations of principle of sincere cooperation. Bad faith of Polish authorities is stressed in relation to deliberate/repeated attempts to kill off PR request (hello Commission where are you?)

5/ First time ECJ is essentially saying (TBC by referring court) the individuals (unlawfully) appointed to SCt by PL President lack independence required under EU law + 1st time ECJ refers to delinquent violation of SAC interim order by Duda the serial violator of PL Constitution

6/ First time ECJ makes clear that referring but also all Polish courts can take existence of special relationships between the (integrity-free) members of (unconstitutional) KRS and the Polish executive to conclude that KRS is a sham body lacking any independence from executive

7/ Miscellaneous: first time I think ECJ judgment refers to ECHR Ástráðsson ruling due to... Polish PG (and serial violator of rule of law - check his role in secret troll farm) to ask for reopening of oral proceedings… Desperate move to delay case unsurprisingly rejected by ECJ

8/ Judgment is further indictment of EU Commission’s failure to do its job: First, it did not launch infringement action re this flagrant crime against EU (rule of) law; Second, Comm essentially argued opposite of what ECJ has decided (see AG). So much for no-compromise stance…

9/ Shortcomings of judgment: ECJ does not tackle the flagrantly unlawful nature of the appointments; refers to (bogus) Const Tribunal without making clear its flagrantly unlawful composition; does not acknowledge nullification/violation of its 2019 AK judgment by CT + DC in 2020

10/ However there is so much ECJ can do in context of preliminary ruling cases which is why it so crucial @vonderleyen Commission gets out of its current irresponsible lethargy. If they don't want the Guardian of Treaties job well then go work elsewhere

verfassungsblog.de/1825-days-late…

@vonderleyen 11/ Next step: ECJ did strongly recall referring court can set aside any measure adopted by PL authorities but they will no doubt - as they have repeatedly done - try to sabotage application of ECJ’s judgment via their fake judges and more lawless criminal actions/measures (end)

@vonderleyen Updated overview of all decided/pending Article 267 preliminary ruling requests originating from Polish courts re Polish measures violating EU judicial independence requirements (to compare to the *3* infringement cases lodged to date with ECJ by the Commission since 2016...)