23 April 2020
Corona Constitutional #15: Polen, die EU und das letzte Wort
Unser heutiges Thema hat mit Corona unmittelbar gar nicht so viel zu tun, mit Krise dafür um so mehr: Es geht um Polen, um das polnische Verfassungsgericht, das in dieser Woche ein Urteil gefällt hat, das, sagen wir mal, erklärungsbedürftig ist. Dieses Urteil, um das Ergebnis vorweg zu nehmen, springt nicht nur mit dem polnischen Verfassungsrecht, sondern auch und vor allem mit dem Europarecht auf beispiellos brachiale Weise um. Darüber spricht Max Steinbeis mit einem Europarechtler, der sich sowohl mit dem Verhältnis von nationaler Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit zum EU-Recht als auch mit dem speziellen Fall Polen viel beschäftigt hat und obendrein ein langjähriger Freund und Autor des Verfassungsblogs ist, nämlich FRANZ MAYER von der Uni Bielefeld. Continue reading >>
1 
18 April 2020
Luxembourg’s Unworkable Test to Protect the Rule of Law in the EU
A key rule of law case illustrating the conversation taking place between national judges and the Court of Justice about the how-to of rule of law protection is the CJEU’s LM ruling dealing with the implementation of the European Arrest Warrant. In it the CJEU developed a test to balance mutual trust and individual rights, particularly the right to a fair trial. The Rechtbank Amsterdam and the Karlsruhe Oberlandesgericht applied Luxembourg’s LM test with respect to Polish suspects in a series of recent (interlocutory) rulings. This national case-law is interesting both for its immediate outcome (suspension of surrenders) and its implicit message to Luxembourg: “Sorry, we tried, but your test is unworkable.” Continue reading >>
0
15 April 2020
Corona Constitutional #9: Bildschirm-Justiz
Wie wirkt sich der Lockdown auf die Justiz aus? Wie muss man sich eine Justiz im Lockdown überhaupt vorstellen? Ist das ein Problem, wenn die Exekutive plötzlich die Judikative herunterfährt? Sind digitalisierte Gerichtsverhandlungen möglich, und könnte die Krise insoweit sogar eine Chance sein? Darüber spricht Max Steinbeis mit dem Sprecher des Bundesvorstands der Neuen Richtervereinigung CARSTEN LÖBBERT. Continue reading >>
0
26 March 2020
The Court gives with one hand and takes away with the other
On March 26, the CJEU released a surprising – if not to say disappointing – judgment on the Polish system of disciplinary measures against judges. While the Court confirmed the ample material scope of Article 19(1)(2) TEU, it simultaneously restricted the procedural possibilities to remedy infringements via the preliminary reference procedure. Continue reading >>24 March 2020
Ukraine’s Presidents and the Judiciary: An Uneasy Relationship
On March 11, 2020, Ukraine’s Constitutional Court issued a decision dealing with the judicial reform of President Volodymyr Zelensky. The Court cooled down the reformist zeal of the presidential office by proclaiming major changes to the legislation on the judiciary unconstitutional. The Court’s decision strengthens judicial independence in Ukraine which is tainted with the legacy of politicization of past presidencies. Continue reading >>
0
24 March 2020
An Election in the Time of Pandemic
In Poland, the Law and Justice (PiS) government has opted not to use its constitutional power to declare a state of emergency due to the COVID-19 spreading. As Wojciech Sadurski explained, its motive is simple: not to postpone the Presidential election in Poland and thus increase the chances of the President-in-Office to win the second term. The question is whether the pandemic may cause invalidity of the election. If the answer is yes, as I suggest, the problem is who should be the judge of it. The chamber of the Polish Supreme Court that is empowered by law to do so does not give an ‘appearance of independence’, following the PiS’s so-called ‘reform’ of the judiciary. Continue reading >>10 March 2020
Commission v Poland: What Happened, What it Means, What it Will Take
9 March 2020. It had been marked in many a Polish diary. Would the EU make steps to finally act to stop the backliding? The electronic board in front of the Grande Salle indicates Case C-791/19 R, Commission versus Poland. A report from Luxembourg. Continue reading >>09 March 2020
Open Letter to the President of the European Commission regarding Poland’s “Muzzle Law”
The current procrastination is akin to dereliction of duty: Waiting to bring infringement actions and to fail to simultaneously seek interim measures when the rule of law in a Member State is so obviously and blatantly deteriorating on an industrial scale only means that the Commission faces a far more serious and intractable problem to deal with later. Continue reading >>05 March 2020
Muzzling Associations of Judges
Art 88 a of Poland's so-called "muzzle law" law prescribes that judges must disclose their membership in associations, their functions performed in non-profit foundations and membership in parties before they became judges. The provision applies to memberships in all kinds of associations, including associations of judges. In this form, the provision violates the European Convention of Human Rights as well as the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Continue reading >>
0
29 February 2020