Opinion of the CJEU spokesperson on the National Court Register and judicial governance in Poland
The comments from the Advocate General of the Court of Justice of the European Union were described by Deputy Justice Minister Marcin Warchoł as a move aimed at undermining the credibility of the National Judicial Council and as a step toward reducing the council to mere formal existence. He warned that such steps would push the Polish judiciary back toward a system dominated by political influence rather than independent legal authority.
The Advocate General delivered an opinion on the National Court Register noting questions about whether the mechanism used by the National Judicial Council to authorize the continuation of a judge’s term after retirement provides solid safeguards for independence. The remarks suggested that the criteria used to decide on whether a judge may continue in office are unclear and not easily verifiable, raising concerns about the protection of judicial impartiality and the integrity of the process.
The key issue concerns whether decisions about extending a judge’s tenure are made with adequate transparency, objectivity, and respect for the principle of irremovability and the independence of the judiciary as understood within the European Union framework. The opinion highlighted the need for clearer standards and verifiable criteria to ensure that extending service does not compromise the independence of judges or the overall integrity of the judiciary.
Readers are reminded that the discussion around the National Court Register continues in the context of ongoing deliberations about the governance of the Polish judiciary and the mechanisms that govern judicial tenure beyond retirement age. The questions raised by the Advocate General are seen by supporters of Polish judicial reform as part of a broader regional debate about accountability, the separation of powers, and the relationship between national institutions and EU law. The exact implications will depend on the future judgment of the Court, which may align with the Advocate General or offer a different interpretation based on legal considerations and EU treaties. The current discourse reflects a complex interaction between national reforms and EU legal standards as assessed by the Court.
Polish officials have framed the discussion as part of a broader effort to safeguard sovereignty and national legal traditions while maintaining the integrity of the judicial system. Critics, however, view the scrutiny as a necessary check on measures that could alter the balance of judicial independence. The ongoing debate underscores the delicate balance between national reform agendas and EU expectations regarding the rule of law and the autonomy of the judiciary.
Under Polish law, judges who wish to continue serving after reaching retirement age must notify the National Council of the Judiciary. The notice must be submitted within the legally prescribed period, and failure to comply renders the application inadmissible. The National Council for the Judiciary can approve a continuation if justified, among other reasons by the interests of the judiciary or a compelling social interest. The Supreme Court has raised questions about whether this approach respects the principle of irremovability and the independence of judges as enshrined in EU treaties.
The discussion continues as the Court weighs the contested mechanism for authorizing the continuation of office by Polish judges after retirement. Many observers expect the Advocate General to contribute to the broader judgment that will clarify whether the approach provides appropriate guarantees for protecting judicial independence. While the Court may sustain the Advocate General’s line of reasoning, it could also diverge and deliver a different verdict based on legal reasoning and treaty commitments. The evolving views from Brussels are being watched closely by participants across the Polish legal landscape and by observers in other EU member states.
The publication of opinions and the ongoing dialogue reflect the procedural stage of this EU legal process. The final outcome remains contingent on the judgment of the Court, which historically may echo or significantly diverge from the Advocate General’s assessment. Observers and participants emphasize that the outcome will have considerable implications for the governance of Polish courts and for how national reform efforts are interpreted within the broader EU rule of law framework.
wkt/PAP
Source: wPolityce