#Poland’s #RuleofLaw Breakdown (Repression of judges update): More defiant *unlawful* repression of 🇵🇱 judges continues with Judge Rutkiewicz the latest 🇵🇱 judge *unlawfully* suspended by *unlawful* appointee of MoJ/PG for applying i.a. 🇪🇺 law/latest ECJ infringement ruling
This gave @GoodLobbyProfs no choice but to pen another statement of support. One can only hope @vonderleyen@VeraJourova@dreynders have already done so privately & are also busy working on new Art 258 actions, Art 260 referral to ECJ + activation of RoL Conditionality Regulation
In parallel, we are witnessing active (not to say criminal) collusion btw unlawful “judges” of Supreme Ct, unlawfully composed “Const Tribunal” & Polish gov to obstruct compliance with ia ECJ judgment in C-487/19 (re #FakeJudge of “Extraordinary Chamber”) wyborcza.pl/7,75398,277901…
This pattern of active collusion with view of perpetuating systemic violations of 🇵🇱🇪🇺 #ruleoflaw requirements also concerns ECtHR judgment in Dolińska-Ficek and Ozimek v. Poland with – I kid you not – the unlawful judge at origin of C-487/19 imploring the government to step in..
This has led to unprecedented rebuke from remaining independent SCt judges (mind you, a purge is in pipeline to get rid of them) themis-sedziowie.eu/materials-in-e…
Perhaps @vonderleyen Commission will wake up & heed the stark unprecedented warning we heard from CJEU President recently (end)
PS. Here is new President of 🇩🇪 Federal Constitutional Court on (the destruction of) judicial independence in 🇵🇱
As promised, a 🧵 below on this key/compelling ECtHR judgment, 1st pilot-judgment in relation to #Poland’s #ruleoflaw breakdown which ECtHR has rightly described as taking form of “interrelated systemic” RoL violations leading to “state of continued non-compliance” with ECHR!
1/ Let me start with more miscellaneous aspects: My insistence not to speak of “judicial reforms” to describe violations of the RoL seems to have gained ground with Court referring to “the so-called “reform of the judiciary” in 🇵🇱” (I knew by then this would be excellent ruling!)
2/ Persistent problem: ECtHR (but also ECJ) continues to include in its case law summaries an overview of decisions taken by irregular bodies masquerading as courts as established by ECtHR itself = absurd = ECtHR judgments need to distinguish lawful courts from unlawful bodies
Have finally been able to finish reading the 563 paragraphs of the ECtHR (First Section) judgment in the case of Judge Tuleya v Poland. A compelling judgment with ramifications going beyond case at hand 🧵
1/ To begin with, one may regret that Judge Tuleya did not benefit from Rule 39 which the ECtHR did not start relying upon to protect 🇵🇱 judges from arbitrary proceedings before PiS 🦘courts until 2022 & which 🇵🇱 authorities are also now openly violating
https://t.co/NQDhqURhRunotesfrompoland.com/2023/02/17/pol…
2/ Judgment will help build disciplinary/criminal cases against “disciplinary officers” who have repeatedly violated multiple rulings when harassing judges applying 🇵🇱 🇪🇺 requirements. See eg grotesque disciplinary investigation re use of Art 267 TFEU & refusal to obey ECJ orders
#Poland's #RuleofLaw breakdown: If correctly reported, this is quite the admission from @VeraJourova as it directly contradicts what Commission told MEPs last Jan and this would make VDL Commission complicit in violation i.a. of law-making Art 7(1) recommendation and milestone...
Releasing EU recovery funding on back of a set of cosmetic, in part unconstitutional, changes rushed in violation i.a. of EU's own lawmaking recovery milestone while ignoring continuing + *systemic* violation of ECJ (& ECtHR) #ruleoflaw rulings would be particularly irresponsible
Just finished reading the 389 paragraphs (a single afternoon wasn’t enough 😬). Overall, a careful/compelling ruling with some new aspects on organisation of national judiciaries, judicial independence & transversality of effective judicial protection requirements (🧵🔽)
1/ Background: This ECJ judgment concerns Poland’s ruling party’s #MuzzleLaw, a grossly unconstitutional and rushed piece of legislation which aimed to (and was used to) punish Polish judges for applying Polish and EU and ECHR #ruleoflaw requirements verfassungsblog.de/open-letter-to…
2/ Re admissibility, 🇵🇱 gov sought to rely on the (un)constitutional “rulings” of the discredited (un)constitutional tribunal (which is no longer a court) to deny ECJ jurisdiction. ECJ answer: a 1st year EU law lecture on basics of EU membership, esp re importance of #ruleoflaw
"Where a Member State adopts measures that undermine the independence of national courts, the EU judicial architecture is compromised and so is the #ruleoflaw within the EU"
Excellent speech by CJEU President Lenaerts on the RoL legal obligations which flow from EU Membership
With respect, however, the ECJ has delivered absurd/reality disconnected judgment in Noble Bank which means, in practice, that ECJ has stopped assessing whether referring court is composed of judges or irregularly appointed individuals & delegated this EU job to ECtHR in practice
ECJ LM test is similarly absurd (& violates effective judicial protection requirements IMO) in situation where e.g. Art 6(1) ECHR and Art 19(1) TEU have been interpreted as "unconstitutional" then second step as currently interpreted by ECJ = reality disconnected again @BardPetra
1/ Before getting into details of it, quick quiz Q: How many times is the rule of law mentioned in 239p-long annexes to Commision proposal for Council implementing decision detailing the Polish recovery and resilience plan?
2/ And the answer is... 0. 0 also for Comm proposal of 17p and 1 mention in Comm working doc of 75p = so 1 mention in 331 pages 👏