The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) held a hearing in Luxembourg on Monday in a long-running case over the status of some judges appointed to Poland’s Supreme Court under contested procedures.
An advocate general is due to issue an opinion on July 16 before the court delivers its final judgment.
Advocate general opinions at the CJEU are not binding, but they often point to the direction of the final ruling.
The judgment that follows could carry major consequences for Poland’s effort to address years of dispute over the rule of law and judicial independence.
At the center of the case is whether a panel of Supreme Court judges can be selected by a judge whose own appointment is considered flawed, especially if the judges chosen for that panel were appointed under the same disputed system.
The case was originally launched in 2018 by Waldemar Żurek, then a judge at the Kraków Regional Court and now Poland’s justice minister.
In 2021, the CJEU already ruled in the broader dispute that judges sitting in the Supreme Court’s Chamber of Extraordinary Review and Public Affairs, if appointed under those contested procedures, did not meet the standard of an independent and impartial tribunal under European Union law.
That ruling was not fully implemented by Poland’s Supreme Court, and the legal battle has continued.
The dispute concerns judges nominated with the involvement of the National Council of the Judiciary (KRS), a constitutional body meant to safeguard judicial independence. Critics say the council became politicized after changes introduced under the former Law and Justice (PiS) government.
The case also involves appointments that were later challenged after the Supreme Administrative Court (NSA) overturned some of the council’s motions, even though the president had already handed the judges their appointment papers.
Poland’s Supreme Court now wants the CJEU to clarify whether a ruling issued with the participation of such a judge legally exists at all. It has asked the Luxembourg court several questions about what counts as an independent, impartial court established by law under EU standards.
The questions go beyond individual rulings. The CJEU has also been asked whether a person appointed in this way can validly carry out administrative acts that shape proceedings, such as setting a hearing date or picking the judges who will hear a case.
The court is also being asked whether such a person can hold leadership roles in the Supreme Court, including first president, chamber president or head of a division.
Another issue is whether a judge whose own appointment was not affected by any irregularities has the right, and possibly the duty, to refuse to sit on a Supreme Court panel dominated by judges appointed through the disputed process.
The hearing began at 2:30 p.m. and ended shortly before 5 p.m., Polish state news agency PAP reported. Among those present were Żurek’s lawyers, Sylwia Gregorczyk-Abram and Michał Wawrykiewicz, as well as representatives of Poland's National Public Prosecutor’s Office, the European Commission, and Poland’s commissioner for human rights.
“There were many questions,” Wawrykiewicz said after the hearing.
Gregorczyk-Abram said the case was ultimately about citizens and their rights.
She said the key issue was whether the country’s highest court, which acts as a court of last resort and shapes the direction taken by other courts, is being run by people whose objectivity and impartiality are beyond doubt.
(rt/gs)
Source: IAR, PAP