29 February 2020
For Norway it’s Official: The Rule of Law is No More in Poland
The so-called “muzzle law”, adopted by the Polish parliament on January 23, was the last straw. On Thursday 27 February, the board of the Norwegian Court Administration decided to withdraw from its planned cooperation with Poland under the justice programme of the EEA and Norway Grants, due to concerns over the Polish justice reforms. Continue reading >>
7 
29 February 2020
Context Matters
On February 9th, the Armenian parliament authorized a referendum that would allow the Prime Minister of Armenia, Nikol Pashinyan, to remove seven of the current nine justices from the Constitutional Court. Pashinyan has called the decisions of the Court a “threat to democracy”. On its face, this seems like yet another example of a populist leader trying to use a referendum to increase his power. Examining the context of the situation in Armenia, however, paints a different picture. Continue reading >>23 February 2020
Could there be a Rule of Law Problem at the EU Court of Justice?
The Member States’ current plan of replacing the sitting U.K. Advocate General at the Court of Justice Eleanor Sharpston before the end of her six-year term raises a serious question whether doing so may violate the European Treaties. If yes, this would be a troubling intrusion on the independence of the Court and the constitutional structure of the Union – just when the EU should be setting an example for the Member States (both current and former). Continue reading >>12 February 2020
Kolevi: Bulgaria’s 10-Year Cat-and-Mouse Game with the Council of Europe and the Venice Commission
A cat-and-mouse game perfectly describes Bulgaria’s stubborn refusal to comply with Kolevi v Bulgaria, which requires a reform of Bulgaria’s Prosecutor’s Office, and it has been going on for a decade. The latest trick pulled out of the bag is quite original – Bulgaria’s government essentially asked Bulgaria’s Constitutional Court to clarify if some of the concerns raised by the Venice Commission were reasonable, and this court deemed the question admissible. Continue reading >>04 February 2020
Fact Check: Is there a ‘Muzzle Law’ for Dutch Judges in the Making? No!
A few days ago the suggestion was made that a draft law is in the making in the Netherlands to prevent Dutch judges from ruling on politically sensitive issues. Should we worry about this? I think not. Continue reading >>
0
03 February 2020
The Struggle of Strasbourg
This year’s Winter Session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) saw three distinct yet interrelated developments. On Tuesday, the Assembly decided to open a monitoring procedure with regard to Poland on behalf of the ongoing rule of law backsliding. On Wednesday, the Assembly decided to ratify the credentials of the Russian delegates which had previously been challenged both on procedural and on substantive grounds. Still on Wednesday, the Assembly backed the proposal for the introduction of a new ‘complementary joint procedure’, together with the Committee of Ministers, in response to violations of fundamental principles underlying the work of the organisation. Continue reading >>30 January 2020
“Judges should be fully insulated from any sort of pressure”
Prof. Koen Lenaerts, President of the Court of Justice of the European Union, explains why mutual trust and judicial independence are of fundamental importance to the EU Member States. Continue reading >>28 January 2020
Is it worth being a Rejtan?
The Rejtan's true gesture – to disagree if something is not consistent with my fundamental beliefs, is it just an act of useless despair? Today I think about it differently. Expressing one's opinion, thoughts, views, even if it does not bring directly any tangible, immediately visible result, it goes far beyond pure symbolism and translates into reality. I have tried to keep this in mind also in my public activity as a judge. Continue reading >>
0
27 January 2020
The Hungarian “Lex NGO” before the CJEU: Calling an Abuse of State Power by its Name
On 14 January 2020, Advocate General Campos Sánchez-Bordona delivered his Opinion in Case C-78/18 on the restrictions incorporated into a 2017 Hungarian law on the financing of NGOs from abroad. He makes clear that Hungary’s “Lex NGO” not only restricts the free movement of capital but also violates several fundamental rights, and is therefore incompatible with EU law. Continue reading >>
0
15 January 2020