25 June 2020
Bringing a Hammer to the Chess Board
In cases where constitutional law is slowly losing its normative force, sophisticated doctrinal-conceptual systems (Verfassungsdogmatik) may even become ridiculous and, to some degree, dishonest. While showing a very few examples of doctrinal absurdities in a judgment of a captured and subservient constitutional court can be meaningful (also in order to corroborate the claim about its captured nature), writing a thorough doctrinal analysis on such a judgment is a futile, frustrating and meaningless exercise. A thorough doctrinal analysis can even legitimize the theater of legalism by taking seriously words which are not worth to be taken seriously. Judicial decisions of captured courts and doctrinal writings of pro-autocracy academics in these countries can be viewed as merely performative acts (as opposed to reasons). Continue reading >>
3 
08 June 2020
To Shoot Down a Judge
Waldemar Żurek, a Polish Judge tirelessly campaigning to preserve the independence of Polish courts, has probably endured every kind of repression that those in power have in their arsenal, save for being suspended as a judge. He was transferred against his will to another division in his court, harassed with anonymous threats over the phone and in emails and is now facing Kafkaesque claims of criminal misconduct. Continue reading >>
0
29 May 2020
The Schrödinger’s Advocate General
We know Brexit means Brexit but should it also mean violating EU Primary Law? Eleanor Sharpston QC, one of the Advocates General of the European Court of Justice, launched an unprecedented legal action "against the EU and her own judicial colleagues after attempts were made to sack her": The national governments of 27 EU Member States decided to terminate her appointment early. Why? Because Brexit ought to mean Brexit or so it seems. Continue reading >>28 May 2020
VB Live: Judicial Independence – a Public Talk by Robert Spano, President of the ECtHR
Today on VB: In his first public talk since taking over the presidency of the European Court of Human Rights, Judge Robert Spano speaks about "The Principle of Judicial Independence and the Democratic Virtues of Human Rights Law." The talk will be followed by questions from the online audience, chaired by iCourts Director, Professor Mikael Rask Madsen. Continue reading >>
0
26 May 2020
Can an Unlawful Judge be the First President of the Supreme Court?
Yesterday, the President of Poland appointed Małgorzata Manowska as the First President of the Supreme Court. The Polish Supreme Court, with Manowska as its First President, may from now on have difficulty providing the appearance of independence as required from all national courts dealing with EU law. Continue reading >>21 May 2020
Verfassungsrichter in der Defensive
Huber, Voßkuhle, Lenaerts – drei Richter des BVerfG bzw. EuGH haben sich in der Presse zu Wort gemeldet, um ihre jeweiligen Urteile im Streit um die Ultra-Vires-Entscheidung zu verteidigen. Diese Reaktionen sind nicht nur rechtlich problematisch, sie drohen auch genau das zu verspielen, was die Richter zu bewahren suchen: das öffentliche Vertrauen und ihre Autorität. Continue reading >>07 May 2020
Appeal to the independent Judges of the Supreme Court
Judges of the Civil Chamber,Judges of the Criminal Chamber, Judges of [...] Continue reading >>30 April 2020
Corona Constitutional #18: Zu wenig, zu spät?
Die EU-Kommission hat bekannt gegeben, Polen wegen des sog. "Maulkorbgesetzes" gegen die unabhängige Justiz mit einem Vertragsverletzungsverfahren zu überziehen – endlich, wie viele sagen würden. Ob das reicht, ob das zu spät kommt angesichts der gnadenlosen Politik der geschaffenen Fakten, die die polnische Regierung an den Tag legt, darüber spricht Max Steinbeis in der heutigen Folge unseres Krisenpodcasts mit dem Demokratie-Aktivisten MARTIN MYCIELSKI von der Open Dialogue Foundation. Continue reading >>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 >>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