In the case Commission v. Poland, C-619/18, delivered on 24th June 2019, the ECJ criticized Polish new Supreme Court Act (then repealed), by alleging that retroactive lowering of retirement age of the judges, and single discretionary extensions granted by the President of the Republic, could have jeopardized the independence of that body from the political power, in violation of Article 19(1) TEU. In the grounding, the European Judges recalled the rulings on the cases "ASJP" (C-64/16) and "Fuchs and Köhler" (C-159/10, C-160/10), which they should have taken into account in terms of comparison. The paper starts from a short reconstruction of the ruling, then it determines if the distinguishing that it does between the Polish law and the national provisions of the cases mentioned above is fully embraceable. Finally, it stresses the key-role played by the political and ideological framework, as implicit but true term in the comparison made by the Court, and shows the possible impact on the guarantee function played by the ECJ.
Nella sentenza sulla causa "Commissione vs. Polonia" (C-619/18), del 24 giugno 2019, la Corte di giustizia dell’Unione europea ha criticato la nuova Legge polacca sulla Corte suprema (poi abrogata), giudicando che la riduzione retroattiva dell'età pensionabile dei giudici e la prorogabilità discrezionale del relativo mandato, ivi previste, avrebbero potuto compromettere l'indipendenza dell’organo dal potere politico, in violazione dell'articolo 19, § 1 del TUE. In motivazione, i Giudici europei hanno richiamato le proprie sentenze ASJP (C-64/16) e Fuchs and Köhler (C-159/10, C-160/10), nel quadro di alcune considerazioni di carattere comparato. Il saggio muove da una breve ricostruzione della pronuncia del 2019, per poi vagliare la condivisibilità del distinguishing da essa operato tra la legge polacca e le disposizioni esaminate, invece, nei due casi precedenti. Infine, esso evidenzia il ruolo implicitamente svolto dal contesto politico e ideologico quale effettivo termine di raffronto e ne indaga le possibili ricadute sulla funzione di garanzia affidata alla Corte.
The use of cryptotype in the comparison by Supranational Courts: brief remarks from the ECJ’s judgement on the early retirement age for Polish Supreme judges
Ignazio Spadaro
2023-01-01
Abstract
In the case Commission v. Poland, C-619/18, delivered on 24th June 2019, the ECJ criticized Polish new Supreme Court Act (then repealed), by alleging that retroactive lowering of retirement age of the judges, and single discretionary extensions granted by the President of the Republic, could have jeopardized the independence of that body from the political power, in violation of Article 19(1) TEU. In the grounding, the European Judges recalled the rulings on the cases "ASJP" (C-64/16) and "Fuchs and Köhler" (C-159/10, C-160/10), which they should have taken into account in terms of comparison. The paper starts from a short reconstruction of the ruling, then it determines if the distinguishing that it does between the Polish law and the national provisions of the cases mentioned above is fully embraceable. Finally, it stresses the key-role played by the political and ideological framework, as implicit but true term in the comparison made by the Court, and shows the possible impact on the guarantee function played by the ECJ.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
The use of cryptotype in the comparison by Supranational Courts.pdf
accesso aperto
Descrizione: testo dell'articolo
Tipologia:
Versione Editoriale (PDF)
Licenza:
Creative commons
Dimensione
447.81 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
447.81 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.