European Union sets conditional path for Poland’s rescue plan
Last week the European Commission agreed to unblock Poland’s 35.4 billion euro access from the Next Generation EU fund. The decision was presented at a plenary session with President Ursula von der Leyen delivering a public statement after criticism from many vice presidents and commission members. With delays in approval, no advance payments will be made until the Polish government fulfills commitments to secure judicial independence as verified by the EU.
Key reforms were outlined: first, dissolve the existing disciplinary chamber and replace it with an independent body created by law; second, reform the disciplinary regime to ensure impartiality and independence as required by the EU Court of Justice, avoiding political control; and third, guarantee that all judges affected by previous disciplinary actions receive the right to review their cases within a new chamber, under a new framework and timeline. von der Leyen stressed the need to eliminate controversial practices, such as references to the CJEU or attempts to undermine a judge’s status, to ensure a fair process.
three conditions
Von der Leyen stated plainly that no payment will occur until the three commitments become milestones. Some observers remain skeptical, yet the commitment is explicit: without these reforms, no payment will be released. The initial tranche of 4.2 billion euros will be disbursed only when a new law comes into force meeting all contractual requirements. The Community Steering Committee added that Poland must demonstrate that all judges dismissed illegally before the end of 2023 have been reinstated; otherwise, further payments will be blocked.
Is everything resolved? The answer is no, but progress is evident. The Polish government is expected to meet the milestones outlined in the bailout plan, though the rule of law concerns persist. Even if progress continues, adoption of the reforms does not end infringement procedures under Article 7 of the treaty. The EU intends to keep decisions from the CJEU binding and will maintain daily fines if necessary, continuing existing infringement actions or launching new ones.
The act of condemnation?
During the debate, three Liberal MEPs—Guy Verhofstadt, Sophie in ’t Veld, and Luis Garicano—proposed a motion of no confidence in the European Commission if repayments to Poland occur before judicial reforms are implemented. To put the proposal to a vote, the authors would need support from at least 71 MEPs and a two-thirds majority, a high threshold. The group argued that no euro should flow to Poland unless the three conditions are met. Greens, Social Democrats, and Liberals voiced similar concerns, insisting that funds should not reach Poland until Brussels’ conditions are fulfilled.
Some conservative voices urged strict adherence to CJEU decisions and the required legislation before any disbursement. Others emphasized the need to balance responsibility with caution, noting that no payments should bypass the commission’s and court’s requirements. Critics argued that the stance should not devolve into political theater but must remain focused on concrete reform. The overall message from many speakers called for delivering the reforms or delaying any funding until those reforms are in place.