πͺπΊβοΈ Not much, and mostly old stuff, in #SOTEU on the rule of law. The focus on corruption is welcome, and so upgrading the external tool that is the sanctions regime. But the lack of reference to undermining EU legal order through captured courts (π΅π±) is disappointing.
Neither there is any reference to increasing problems with legality, especially in the context of emergency powers (π·π΄) and border crises (π΅π±π±πΉ), golden visas and dubious legal schemes that allowed many Russian oligarchs to enjoy EU (π²πΉπ΅πΉ), I could go on
Don't get me wrong - it's a shockingly good and strong SOTEU in many areas, from Russia and Ukraine through EU finances, digital democracy to the climate crisis and impending recession. On multiple fronts, it gets far more direct and timely than many previous SOTEUs did.
But the rule of law crisis is an acute problem of EU, and needs addressing beyond haphazard and inconsistent use of infringement procedures, RRF withholding and RoL conditionality. Unfortunately, and not unexpectedly, the war seems to have pushed this area out of the spotlight.
β’ β’ β’
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
π΅π±βοΈGood news from the (interim) Professional Liability Chamber of the Polish Supreme Court (yes, it's one of these weeks). Judge Maciej Rutkiewicz, doubly suspended from his job - both by the Disciplinary Chamber and by the President of his court - has been un-suspended. 1/
The Chamber has found the Disciplinary Chamber's decision to be remarkably unfounded. Rutkiewicz dropped a criminal case against a prosecutor, citing the circumstance of an alleged ineffective waiver of prosecutorial immunity by the same Disciplinary Chamber. 2/
Based on the recent laws on Supreme Court and Ordinary Courts, the new Chamber found that a judicial decision cannot be grounds for suspension, and the law provides for immediate suspension of a judge only in case of manifestly excessive behaviour. 3/
π΅π±βοΈBombshell: ECtHR interim order regarding Polish judge facing disciplinary procedure, ordering to halt the proceedings before the newly established Chamber of Professional Liability of the Supreme Court or to have the case heard exclusively by "old" judges. 1/
Previous interim orders by Strasbourg court concerning the new Chamber requested the government to inform the applicants of actions taken by the Chamber. This one goes one step further and signals a potential ECtHR blow to the elaborate new setup of disciplinary proceedings. 2/
I also read it as signaling that ECtHR will find that a panel of the new Chamber consisting only of "old" judges won't lead to a violation of the right to a fair trial. Currently, the Chamber is operating in an interim composition with 3 "old" and 2 "new" judges. 3/
π΅π±βοΈπͺπΊ Meanwhile, a clash within the Polish government - PM Morawiecki proposes to bury the hatchet and, erm, "set aside" the anti-EU law rulings of the Constitutional Tribunal. Naturally, his awkward coalition partner PG/MoJ Ziobro is vehemently against such move.
Morawiecki is reported to propose a statement from PL govt that these judgments "do not affect Poland's obligations vis-Γ -vis the EU, while at the same time they do not constitute an established line of jurisprudence". Ziobro, naturally, sees them as ironclad law of the land.
The longest pause here should be caused by the fact that the Polish government quite openly sees the judgments of the Tribunal as binding only to the point where the government wants them to be. To be kept in mind by anybody drawing straight parallels between BVerfG and CT.
π΅π±βοΈ Calendar alert: Tomorrow's hearing at Polish Constitutional Tribunal in case K 8/21 "anti-EU law, precisely the 1m EUR/day fine over non-compliance with CJEU order in case C-204/21" has been... yes, rescheduled, for undefined date. Thus, no live tweeting from me tomorrow ;(
The case has been rescheduled on request by Polish MoFA, which claims that the case should be ideally heard in 2023 due to its complexity and the fact that MoFA resources are stretched due to the war. Fun fact: MoFA isn't the applicant in this case, it's just one of participants.
Seeing how MoFA is a rather peripheral participant here and the case was brought before the Tribunal by PG/MoJ Ziobro, it all looks like once again a politically motivated pivot, likely with the European Commission hanging somewhere in the background.
πͺπΊβοΈπ΅π±ππΊπΆHungary, Poland, rule of law, EU recovery fund - where do we stand? The coming weeks will be make it or break it for both countries getting the money, with some interesting divergences being already visible. π§΅
The story so far - Commission refuses to move anywhere forward with the Hungarian RRF due to issues chiefly related to corruption and misuse of EU funds, with Poland - a touted agreement on milestones and changes to the judiciary, followed by 180 from both COM and Poland.
ππΊ Ever pragmatic, Orban floats the idea of an agreement with the Commission and setting up an independent anti-corruption authority to satisfy the demands. The prior labeling of @VeraJourova as "persona non grata" has been apparently quickly forgotten.