The Last Soldier Standing? Courts Versus Politicians and the Rule of Law Crisis in the New Member States of the EU

Kochenov, Dimitry; Bárd, Petra

doi:10.1007/978-94-6265-359-7_11

Cited by 30 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 79 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…68 Scheppele (2016) and Schmidt and Bogdanowicz (2018). 69 For a different view according to which the horizontal route of mutual trust is the less preferred route in comparison to the vertical infringement proceedings/preliminary references route, see Kochenov and Bárd (2019), p. 275. 70 CJEU, Case C-216/18 Minister for Justice and Equality (Deficiencies in the system of Justice), supra note 28, para.…”

Section: Institutional Aspectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet, as already shown by others, this second prong makes the setting aside of mutual trust almost impossible, given that the burden to show how a systemic breach of the rule of law effects his or her case individually might be very high. 75 Hence it was proposed that once the first step of the test is satisfied, the burden of proof of the second prong should shift to the stronger party, namely the home State. 76 But, even beyond that, it seems to me that the second prong of the test should be put in correlation to the systemic deficit which has been established in the examination of the first prong.…”

Section: Individual Examinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Suspending Horizontal Solange: A Decentralized Instrument for Protecting Mutual Trust and the European Rule of Law

Canor

2021

Defending Checks and Balances in EU Member States

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mutual trust is the basis on which the Member States’ judiciaries are expected to deal with each other in the European Union. By constitutionalizing the principle of mutual trust, the CJEU has introduced an axiological addition to the basic structure of the European Union. From a Union which concentrated on the vertical relationships between each Member State and the central Union’s institutions, the Union has turned out to be additionally preoccupied with the horizontal relationships among the Member States, which are based on what might be called a doctrine of Horizontal Solange.According to the principle of mutual trust, each Member State must presume that all other Member States are in compliance with EU law, in particular promote its values and respect European fundamental rights. This presumption, however, can be rebutted in exceptional circumstances. These exceptional circumstances are based on a two-prong test: first, the violation of the values or the fundamental rights must amount to a systemic deficiency; second, there is a need for an assessment whether the individual concerned will be the victim of this systemic deficiency.This contribution critically analyses these exceptional circumstances. Regarding the first prong, it is argued that the existence of systemic deficiencies should ideally be established by the CJEU via preliminary ruling references or via direct infringement proceedings. Alternatively, such systemic deficiencies may also be established by domestic courts in a host Member State. Regarding the second prong, it is argued that the individual test is redundant in cases where the systemic deficiency imposes challenges to the existing legal order of the Member State in question. Finally, it is argued that the suspension of mutual trust can serve as a decentralized instrument for protecting the European rule of law by pressuring the violating state to restore the rule of law.

show abstract

Section: Institutional Aspectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Individual Examinationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Suspending Horizontal Solange: A Decentralized Instrument for Protecting Mutual Trust and the European Rule of Law

Canor

2021

Defending Checks and Balances in EU Member States

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ono što je revolucionarno u pristupu SPEU jeste široko tumačenje pojma nezavisnosti sudstva i uzajamnog povjerenja i priznanja, čime se na određen način osnažuje decentralizovani sistem pravosuđa u Uniji, i to u horizontalnom i vertikalnom pravcu. 45 Na primjer, u predmetu LM 46 Sud je definisao nezavisnost sudstva iz spoljne i unutrašnje perspektive. Naime, spoljna perspektiva upućuje na to da nezavisnost sudstva podrazumijeva zaštitu sudija od spoljnih faktora i pritisaka, dok se unutrašnja odnosi na neutralnost i nepristrasnost sudija prema strankama u postupku.…”

Section: ) Odgovor Speu Na Reformu Poljskog Pravosuđaunclassified

“…Samim tim, Sud je izbjegao ponavljanje grešaka iz prošlosti, kao na primjer u mađarskom slučaju 52 , gdje je potpuno identična stvar bila formirana kao diskriminacija na osnovu Direktive 2006/54, a ne pitanje vladavine prava, pa je na taj način "otmica" mađarskog sudstva od strane vlasti prošla nezapaženo. 53 U posljednjem sudskom postupku protiv Poljske 54 Komisiji se, na osnovu člana 259 Ugovora o funkcionisanju EU, pridružilo i pet država članica (Holandija, Belgija, Danska i Finska) izražavajući zabrinutost povodom reformisanog Disciplinskog vijeća za sudije koji ne ispunjava principe nezavisnosti i nepristrasnosti, te zahtjevajući od Suda da predmet sagleda iz perspektive fundamentalnih vrijednosti Unije i upućujući na povrede člana 19 Ugovora o EU i člana 47 Povelje EU o osnovnim pravima. 55 U aprilu 2020. godine Sud je izdao nalog za privremene mjere protiv Poljske u vidu suspenzije Disciplinskog vijeća, gdje je posebno naglasio opasnost od uticaja na nezavisnost sudstva i štete u pogledu komunitarnog pravnog poretka, kao i vladavine prava.…”

Section: ) Odgovor Speu Na Reformu Poljskog Pravosuđaunclassified

Sud pravde Evropske unije kao posljednja nada za sunovrat vladavine prava u Poljskoj — poseban osvrt na pravosudnu reformu

Tošić¹

2021

Evropsko zakonodavstvo

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Posljednja pravosudna reforma u Poljskoj izazvala je mnoštvo reakcija u akademskom pravnom prostoru, budući da zadire i u vladavinu prava kao jedno od fundamentalnih načela Evropske unije. Niz kontraverznih reformi, koje svoje uporište nalaze u političkim ambicijama aktuelnih državnih lidera, razmatrao se i pred Sudom pravde Evropske unije u nekoliko navrata. Sud je u svim slučajevima utvrdio manjkavosti reformisanog poljskog sistema pravosuđa, otišavši čak korak dalje u tom pravcu primjenom ekstenzivnog metoda tumačenja sopstvene nadležnosti, za razliku od ranijih slučajeva ove vrste u kojima se pretežno bavio tehničkim pitanjima. Iako se Sudu nesporno može pripisati značajan napredak u samom pristupu pojmu i značaju vladavine prava unutar Unije, ne postoji opšta saglasnost relevantnih institucionalnih i političkih aktera povodom poljskog ustavnog pitanja, budući da političke institucije insistiraju na sagledavanju istog kroz prizmu diskriminacije sudija, a ne vladavine prava, iako bi obrnut pristup bio adekvatniji. U narednom periodu očekuje se i konačna presuda SPEU u posljednjem predmetnom slučaju u vezi sa poljskom pravosudnom reformom i diskriminacijom sudija poljskog Vrhovnog suda, što će biti interesantno za posmatranje imajući u vidu nedostatak opšte saglasnosti i saradnje glavnih političkih aktera u cjelokupnom procesu. Trenutna situacija u Poljskoj nesumnjivo može da se posmatra i kao spoljnja i unutrašnja opasnost, te iz tog razloga ova tema zahtjeva veću pozornost u nadolazećem periodu. Kao i u svim prethodnim krizama ove vrste, sve oči su okrenute ka Sudu pravde Evropske unije, kao konačnom arbitru u rješavanju ustavno-pravnih sporova unutar Unije. Ključne riječi: Sud pravde Evropske unije, ustavno pravo, poljski sistem pravosuđa, vladavina prava, diskriminacija, Evropska unija, Evropska komisija. * Autorka je doktorantkinja na Pravnom fakultetu Univerziteta u Beogradu.

show abstract

“…Indeed, the tension created by the jeopardy in which the rule of law has been placed in Hungary and Poland has revealed institutional disparities within the Union. As Kochenov and Bard aptly observe: ‘All that is being done by the institutions appears to reveal one and only one point: there is a total disagreement among all the actors involved as to how to sort out the current impasse’ (2018, 4).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strengthening the founding values of the EU: The potential role of the Fundamental Rights Agency

Margaritis¹

2019

European View

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rule of law is one of the founding values of the EU, as indicated in Article 2 TEU. This provision recognises that the rule of law is a core value, inherent to liberal democracy, and one which characterised the Union and its member states long before the formal establishment of the EU by the Maastricht Treaty. However, several member states, most notably Poland and Hungary, seem to have placed this value in jeopardy, leading EU institutions to disagree on how to combat this problem and its political consequences. The aim of this article is to propose a solution that involves a rather neglected, yet certainly competent actor, the Fundamental Rights Agency. The outcome would be twofold: on the one hand, the rule of law would be vitally strengthened; on the other, the role of the Agency would be fortified in line with its scope.

show abstract

The Last Soldier Standing? Courts Versus Politicians and the Rule of Law Crisis in the New Member States of the EU

Cited by 30 publications

References 79 publications

Suspending Horizontal Solange: A Decentralized Instrument for Protecting Mutual Trust and the European Rule of Law

Suspending Horizontal Solange: A Decentralized Instrument for Protecting Mutual Trust and the European Rule of Law

Sud pravde Evropske unije kao posljednja nada za sunovrat vladavine prava u Poljskoj — poseban osvrt na pravosudnu reformu

Strengthening the founding values of the EU: The potential role of the Fundamental Rights Agency

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About