A pro-EU rally earlier this year in Warsaw, Poland, where the right-wing government has introduced controversial judicial reforms (AFP Photo/Janek SKARZYNSKI) |
Warsaw
(AFP) - Poland's right-wing government and the centrist opposition both claimed
victory Tuesday over a ruling by Europe's top court on a controversial judicial
reform that critics insist undermines the independence of the country's judges.
The
European Union's Court of Justice (CJEU) ruled that Polish judges must decide
on the validity of a disciplinary chamber imposed on them by the government, in
a possible setback for Warsaw's contentious reforms.
As part of
an alleged effort to assert greater political control, Poland's right-wing
populist Law and Justice (PiS) government has created a disciplinary panel for
judges that opponents allege lacks independence.
The CJEU on
Tuesday stopped short of declaring the new body illegal, but asserted "the
primacy of EU law" and said courts must not refer cases to the panel
without ensuring it is "independent and impartial".
After
taking office in late 2015, Poland's right-wing Law and Justice (PiS) party
introduced sweeping reforms it insists are needed to tackle corruption.
It says it
wants to overhaul a judicial system still haunted by the communist era.
But
Brussels has accused the government of threatening to undermine principles like
the rule of law and judicial independence that it signed onto in 2004 when
Warsaw joined the EU.
In late
2017, the EU launched unprecedented proceedings against Poland over
"systemic threats" posed by the reforms to the rule of law that could
see its EU voting rights suspended.
'Legal
chaos'
Supreme
Court President Malgorzata Gersdorf immediately called on Poland's government
and parliament to eliminate the legal problems identified by the CJEU in order
to "avoid a situation of uncertainty, even legal chaos".
She said
the PiS-dominated parliament had passed the reforms "at night, quickly,
without debate, without respect for the democratic system of legislation".
They have
resulted in Poland's "judicial system being subject to political power and
pilloried by international organisations", she said.
Supreme
Court spokesman Justice Michal Laskowski said that until the laws in question
are amended, both the current disciplinary procedures and the appointment of
judges recommended by the PiS-created KRS National Judicial Council should be
suspended.
Polish
judges opposed to the reforms also hailed the verdict even though it did not go
as far as some would have wished.
Krystian
Markiewicz, president of the Iustitia judges' organisation, urged members of
the KRS, whose independence is disputed in judicial circles, to
"resign", and for the approximately 300 judges appointed on its
recommendation to "refrain from making rulings" until the Supreme
Court decision.
'Political questions'
For his
part, Polish President Andrzej Duda said the ruling demonstrated the CJEU's
refusal to directly address the questions that three Supreme Court judges
raised in their complaint against the PiS reforms.
"So
these questions are political and they should find an internal solution inside
our country, and the (European) court will not interfere in matters of Polish domestic
policy, especially with regard to the functioning of the judicial system,"
Duda told reporters in Warsaw.
PiS Justice
Minister Zbigniew Ziobro, the principal author of the reforms, said the CJEU
ruling met his expectations.
He said it
"means that the CJEU is not competent to judge matters related to the
organisation of the Polish judicial system and has sent the ball back to
Poland's court."
On November
5, the ECJ ruled that Poland was wrong to lower the retirement age of Supreme
Court judges, a reform that critics said undermined the independence of the
judiciary.
In
Tuesday's ruling, the court said that when complaints over early retirement are
appealed, Polish courts can only defer the decision to the disciplinary chamber
if they judge the panel to be independent.
"The
principle of the primacy of EU law thus requires it to disapply the provision
of national law which reserves exclusive jurisdiction to the Disciplinary
Chamber to hear and rule on cases of the retiring of judges," it said.
Retirement
cases must "be examined by a court which meets the requirements of
independence and impartiality and which, were it not for that provision, would
have jurisdiction in the relevant field".
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.