Poland's Rule of Law Breakdown: A Five-Year Assessment of EU's (In)Action.

IF 3.3 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Hague Journal on the Rule of Law Pub Date : 2021-01-01 Epub Date: 2021-03-24 DOI:10.1007/s40803-021-00151-9
Laurent Pech, Patryk Wachowiec, Dariusz Mazur
{"title":"Poland's Rule of Law Breakdown: A Five-Year Assessment of EU's (In)Action.","authors":"Laurent Pech, Patryk Wachowiec, Dariusz Mazur","doi":"10.1007/s40803-021-00151-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To reinstate what amounts to a \"Soviet-style justice system\", Polish authorities have repeatedly and deliberately violated the Polish Constitution and EU law. Rather than comprehensively detailing these repeated violations, this article focuses on the EU dimension of Poland's rule of law breakdown. Using the activation of the Rule of Law Framework by the European Commission on 13 January 2016 as a starting point, this article offers a critical five-year assessment of EU's (in)action starting with an overview of the extent to which virtually all of the multiple problematical issues identified early on by the Commission have yet to be addressed by Polish authorities by January 2021. Regarding the Commission and the Council's (in)action, this article argues that the Commission has systematically acted in a too little too late fashion while the Council has systematically failed to meaningfully act, with the inaction of these two EU institutions amounting, at times, to dereliction of duties. By contrast, the Court of Justice has forcefully defended judicial independence whenever an infringement case was lodged with it by the Commission. The Court of Justice's record in preliminary ruling cases is more mixed due, in part, to the Court's apprehension to undermine the principle of mutual trust. The article ends with a list of key lessons and recommendations which reflect the EU's few successes and many failures highlighted in this article. It is submitted inter alia that more statements, dialogue and reports are not going to help contain, let alone solve Poland's rule of law crisis. It is indeed no longer a crisis the EU is facing but a total breakdown in the rule of law in Poland which, in turn, represents a threat to the interconnected legal order that underpins the EU.</p>","PeriodicalId":45733,"journal":{"name":"Hague Journal on the Rule of Law","volume":"13 1","pages":"1-43"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7987743/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hague Journal on the Rule of Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40803-021-00151-9","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/3/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To reinstate what amounts to a "Soviet-style justice system", Polish authorities have repeatedly and deliberately violated the Polish Constitution and EU law. Rather than comprehensively detailing these repeated violations, this article focuses on the EU dimension of Poland's rule of law breakdown. Using the activation of the Rule of Law Framework by the European Commission on 13 January 2016 as a starting point, this article offers a critical five-year assessment of EU's (in)action starting with an overview of the extent to which virtually all of the multiple problematical issues identified early on by the Commission have yet to be addressed by Polish authorities by January 2021. Regarding the Commission and the Council's (in)action, this article argues that the Commission has systematically acted in a too little too late fashion while the Council has systematically failed to meaningfully act, with the inaction of these two EU institutions amounting, at times, to dereliction of duties. By contrast, the Court of Justice has forcefully defended judicial independence whenever an infringement case was lodged with it by the Commission. The Court of Justice's record in preliminary ruling cases is more mixed due, in part, to the Court's apprehension to undermine the principle of mutual trust. The article ends with a list of key lessons and recommendations which reflect the EU's few successes and many failures highlighted in this article. It is submitted inter alia that more statements, dialogue and reports are not going to help contain, let alone solve Poland's rule of law crisis. It is indeed no longer a crisis the EU is facing but a total breakdown in the rule of law in Poland which, in turn, represents a threat to the interconnected legal order that underpins the EU.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
波兰的法治崩溃:欧盟(在)行动的五年评估
为了恢复所谓的“苏联式司法体系”,波兰当局一再故意违反波兰宪法和欧盟法律。本文并非全面详述这些一再发生的违法行为,而是侧重于波兰法治崩溃的欧盟层面。本文以欧盟委员会于2016年1月13日启动的法治框架为起点,对欧盟(在)行动进行了为期五年的关键评估,首先概述了委员会早期发现的几乎所有有问题的问题在多大程度上尚未由波兰当局在2021年1月之前解决。关于欧盟委员会和欧盟理事会的行动,本文认为,欧盟委员会系统地采取了太少、太晚的行动,而欧盟理事会系统地未能采取有意义的行动,这两个欧盟机构的不作为有时相当于玩忽职守。相比之下,每当委员会向法院提出侵权案件时,法院都有力地捍卫司法独立。法院在初步裁决案件中的记录比较复杂,部分原因是法院担心破坏相互信任的原则。文章最后列出了一系列重要的经验教训和建议,这些教训和建议反映了欧盟在本文中强调的少数成功和许多失败。有人特别指出,更多的声明、对话和报告无助于遏制,更不用说解决波兰的法治危机了。事实上,欧盟面临的不再是一场危机,而是波兰法治的彻底崩溃,这反过来又对支撑欧盟的相互关联的法律秩序构成了威胁。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
18.20%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: The Hague Journal on the Rule of Law (HJRL) is a multidisciplinary journal that aims to deepen and broaden our knowledge and understanding about the rule of law. Its main areas of interest are: current developments in rule of law in domestic, transnational and international contextstheoretical issues related to the conceptualization and implementation of the rule of law in domestic and international contexts;the relation between the rule of law and economic development, democratization and human rights protection;historical analysis of rule of law;significant trends and initiatives in rule of law promotion (practitioner notes).The HJRL is supported by HiiL Innovating Justice, The Hague, the Netherlands and the Paul Scholten Center for Jurisprudence at the Law School of the University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.Editorial PolicyThe HJRL welcomes contributions from academics and practitioners with expertise in any relevant field, including law, anthropology, economics, history, philosophy, political science and sociology. It publishes two categories of articles: papers (appr. 6,000-10,000 words) and notes (appr. 2500 words). Papers are accepted on the basis of double blind peer-review. Notes are accepted on the basis of review by two or more editors of the journal. Manuscripts submitted to the HJRL must not be under consideration for publication elsewhere. Acceptance of the Editorial Board’s offer to publish, implies that the author agrees to an embargo on publication elsewhere for a period of two years following the date of publication in the HJRL.
期刊最新文献
Purging the Judiciary After a Transition: Between a Rock and a Hard Place. How to Assess Rule-of-Law Violations in a State of Emergency? Towards a General Analytical Framework The Shifting Landscape of Judicial Independence Criteria Under the Preliminary Reference Procedure: A Comment on the CJEU’s Recent Case Law and the Trajectory of Article 267 TFEU The Rule of Law and Corporate Actors: Measuring Influence EU Lawlessness Law at the EU-Belarusian Border: Torture and Dehumanisation Excused by ‘Instrumentalisation’
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1