2022-02-03 13:08 update: 2022-02-07, 17:55
Andrzej Duda Fot. PAP/Leszek Szymański
President Andrzej Duda announced on Thursday that he will file a draft of a bill changing the functioning of Poland's Supreme Court.
Commenting on his decision, Duda said it had been "much awaited" on the Polish political scene. One of the bill's main proposals is the liquidation of the Supreme Court's disciplinary chamber, which the EU has contested as restrictive to judicial independence.
"I propose the liquidation of the Supreme Court's disciplinary chamber, and for its judges to be able to transfer to other chambers, or retire," Duda said.
Duda's move aims to resolve a protracted dispute with the European Commission (EC) over the Polish government's judicial reforms.
"This draft should be a tool for Polish government to end the dispute with the EC and unblock Poland's National Recovery Plan," he added.
The European Commission has not yet approved the Polish plan due to the dispute over the rule of law. Under the EU’s Recovery Fund, Poland could receive some EUR 58.1 billion, including EUR 23.9 billion in grants and EUR 34.2 billion in loans.
In October 2019, The European Commission decided to take Poland to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) over the disciplinary chamber, arguing that it violated judicial independence and thus ran against EU law. The CJEU ruled that the chamber lacks sufficient independence from the government.
On October 27 last year, the CJEU imposed a EUR 1 million daily fine on Poland until it complies with a July 14 ruling by the same court demanding the immediate suspension of the chamber, which disciplines judges.
In January, the EC sent its first call for payment of the fine to Poland, to cover the period from November 3, 2021 to January 10, 2022. The Commission gave Warsaw 45 days to pay the fines, which, according to Reuters, amount to around EUR 70 million.
The institution of the disciplinary chamber was part of a broader overhaul of the Polish judicial system, large parts of which have been contested by the EU on the grounds that they made courts vulnerable to political pressure. (PAP)
