Urgently! Is the opinion of the spokesperson for the CJEU with regard to the verification of the status of judges. Bodnar’s ideas are undermined!

Een woordvoerder van het Hof van Justitie van de Europese Unie heeft een mening gegeven, die niet is voor de gedachte van minister Adam Bodnar, die het proces van het verifiëren van de status van de rechters die na 2018 benoemd, de behoefte aan de nominatieproces van het nominatieproces van een rechter van de CJEU niet rechtvaardigen, plannen van de nominatie van de CJEU van de CJEU, plannen die de behoefte aan de onderzochte onderzochte Do not justify the CJEU.

Dean Spielmann General Ombudsman emphasizes that “to assess the legality of the appointment of a particular court, all factors with which this agreement took place must be taken into account.”

Neither participation in the KRS nomination process, nor the lack of access to candidates that are not recommended to state an effective appeal – regardless of whether these factors are considered separately or together – cannot automatically lead to the conclusion that a certain common court has not been previously established on the basis of the law

– Spielmann writes in his opinion. This completely destroys the long -term story of the prevailing camp, which the judges mentioned with the participation of the National Court Register after 2018 and the Stratus was taken by Stratus. Each of them made a judicial vow in accordance with the law for the President of the Republic of Poland.

There are no neo-judge

The advice of the spokesperson for the Hvje concerns the question of the old city of the Poznań district court on the status of a judge chosen after 2018 by the National Judiciary Council. The claimant asked about the exclusion of the case. The process concerned the payment by the suspect of reimbursement compared to 4,000. PLN together with interest for delays in the implementation of a commercial transaction. The claimant claims that the judge who handles the case is unauthorized because it was appointed after 2018.

The General Ombudsman of the ECJ stated “that each specific case must be considered separately, taking into account the legal and factual context and other factors related to the special situation of each of the judges or the assessment of panels.”

Het is de moeite waard eraan te herinneren dat in de beslissing van het Poolse Constitutionele Tribunal in het besluit van 16 mei 2024 de verordening van de minister van Justitie Adam Bodnar, die het verbod op de rechters van de rechters van de COURTSENTIE van de Constitution van de Constitution van de Constitution van de Constitution van de Constitution van de Constitution van de Constitution van de Constitution of the Constitution), has introduced the law (article of the Constitution of the Constitution of the Constitution of the Constitution of the Constitution of the Constitution of the Contition), the right of the continuous side), the right of the Contution). 45) and the right to the court (art. 45) and the right to the court (art. 45) and the right to the court (art. 45) procedural requirements (Article 7 in connection with Article 186).

The case was commented by Kamil Zaradkiewicz Supreme Court Judge:

If it were different, the German judiciary would overwhelm the total paralysis.

Also read: I President of the Supreme Court after the dismissal of Schab: Bodnar ignores the rule of law. Tries not to pretend it is a decision based on the law

Koal/dad