The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled on Tuesday that irregularities in a judge’s appointment do not in themselves prove that the judge lacks independence. Instead, courts must examine all the individual circumstances of a given appointment, it said.
The ruling came after questions from a Polish court about whether the status of judges appointed with the involvement of the reshaped National Council of the Judiciary (KRS) can be challenged.
The body was overhauled after 2017 under reforms introduced by the former Law and Justice (PiS) government, and its independence has been widely contested.
The Luxembourg-based court said Poland should create a legal framework allowing a proper assessment of whether improperly appointed judges can continue to perform judicial duties.
It said such a system would help restore public confidence in the courts and protect the separation of powers, the principle that the legislative, executive and judicial branches should remain independent of one another.
Michał Wawrykiewicz, a European Parliament lawmaker with Poland's governing Civic Coalition (KO), said the ruling was a call for the country's political leadership, especially President Karol Nawrocki, to help repair the justice system.
He argued that the court had once again shown how deeply Poland’s judicial system was damaged by changes made between 2015 and 2023 when the PiS party was in power.
Wawrykiewicz said the CJEU was effectively urging Poland’s lawmakers, and above all the president, to pass legislation that would repair the system as a whole. He added that earlier changes to the KRS had already been blocked by former President Andrzej Duda, and now by Nawrocki.
Krzysztof Śmiszek, a European Parliament member from the New Left group, said the ruling confirmed that such cases must be judged individually.
He said courts should consider whether a judge had engaged politically on one side or another, and called the judgment confirmation of very high standards of protection for participants in the justice system.
Śmiszek also said the ruling placed responsibility on the national legislature to fix the situation. In his view, that means the issue now rests largely with Nawrocki, whom he accused of refusing to cooperate with the government and parliamentary majority on judicial reform, including changes to the KRS.
Arkadiusz Mularczyk, a European lawmaker from PiS, read the ruling differently. He said it clearly shows that nominations granted during the years of the new KRS cannot be rejected across the board.
According to Mularczyk, a judge’s independence can be challenged only by showing a specific violation in that individual case. He said it was wrong to question the professional standing of judges who took part in promotion procedures during that period simply because of when they applied.
Mularczyk argued that any broader approach would cast doubt on rulings handed down by more than 3,000 judges who received appointments or promotions during those years. He warned that such a move could lead to chaos in the justice system.
The dispute over these appointments has become one of the biggest legal and political issues in Poland since the PiS-era court reforms.
Tuesday’s ruling does not end that conflict, but it does make clear that blanket solutions will face serious legal obstacles, Polish state news agency PAP reported.
Established in 1952, the Luxembourg-based Court of Justice of the European Union aims to ensure that member states comply with obligations under the bloc's treaties. The top EU court also interprets EU law at the request of national courts. Photo: EPA/JULIEN WARNAND
(rt/gs)
Source: IAR, PAP, curia.europa.eu