The controversy over the right way to deal with Poland and speculation about “Polexit” put considerable pressure on the EU. As the Polish demonstration no longer wants to submit to European law, it is urging many European parliamentarians and some heads of state to take drastic action against the government, in particular: the withdrawal of budget funds. On the other hand, President Angela Merkel is trying to defuse the issue ahead of the EU summit in Brussels on Thursday and Friday this week. He openly shares with others in the EU the concern that the dispute could escalate into a union failure if Poland and Hungary block all outstanding decisions. Common to all parties: At present no one knows a way.
In a speech to the European Parliament in Strasbourg on Tuesday, Polish Prime Minister Mathews Moravic denied the allegations that he wanted to expel his country from the European Union. Leading opposition politicians expressed this concern during the European debate in the Polish parliament on Thursday last week. There Morawiecki compared the “Polexit” to the Loch Ness monster, but insisted that Poland was “being attacked” by European companies. In Strasbourg, the head of government of Poland will defend the October 7 ruling of the Constitutional Court, which he brought in, according to which parts of the EU treaties do not comply with the Polish constitution.
Morawiecki sent a letter to EU leaders and the government on Monday, arguing that Poland still respects the primacy of EU law, but has not abandoned constitutional scrutiny. In a letter to the government, Moravic warned that the EU could not soon become a union of independent states. “The EU is gradually being transformed into a center-managed entity run by corporations, not a federation of independent, equal and sovereign states, but without the democratic control of European citizens.”
In fact, Poland not only ignores the decisions of the EU Commission and the European Court of Justice (ECJ), but also undermines the rule of law: after the ECJ order in May, Poland must immediately open the polar open-cast lignite Mine on the border triangle between Germany and Germany, ignoring EU law, the Czech Republic To conclude, Moraviki also ignored the order.
In Strasbourg, Moraviki is likely to emphasize the so-called independence of the judiciary in general and the Constitutional Court in particular. In fact, recently known email exchanges between Moraviki and the head of his company, according to which decisions on judicial positions, for example in the special chamber under political control in the Supreme Court, the Prime Minister, the President of Poland and closely associated with the head of the Constitutional Court Julia Priaspaska, have no authority over it.
Presibska regularly meets with the nominally deputy prime minister, Zaroshov Kaczynski, but is also the leader of the ruling PIS party and the real head of government. Since Prussapska presided over the Constitutional Court, the court made no decision against the state. Accordingly, the October 7 ruling, based on Prime Minister Moravic’s 100-page summary, was seen as a declaration of war on the EU: the EU will not allow Poland to slow down the government’s policy of bringing in the entire judiciary. Under its control.
Legal professionals known as “DobleGangerers” also took part in the Constitutional Court’s ruling, which was illegally enforced by the PIS following a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) – replacing the constitutionally elected judges already in accordance with the law. The European Parliament has already declared the Polish court “illegal”. Twenty-six former constitutional judges, including four former court judges, were critical of the verdict, which included factual errors. Even independent Polish lawyers consider the verdict invalid because of the participation of “doppelgangers”.
Commission chair Ursula van der Leyen will also speak at the Strasbourg Plenary, which is under intense pressure to take action against Poland. Last week, the Parliamentary Legal Affairs Committee voted by a majority in favor of a “non-performance complaint” against Van der Leyen, which was interpreted as a final warning. The Speaker of Parliament must submit the complaint. And in Tuesday’s debate, the demand for the commission to immediately use the so-called legal rule will be strong. This will make it possible to freeze a wide range of budget funds if the rule of law is violated.
The EU Commission may have taken action against Poland before the rule of law came into force, and as soon as the rule of law, which began there in late 2015, was dissolved, it could immediately sue the ECJ and then apply for fines in the millions. However, the Commission avoided doing this for many years and relied for a long time on an “ultimately fruitless -” dialogue with Warsaw.
The July 14 order and a July 15 ruling forced the ECJ to dissolve or re-liberate several judicial bodies that had been brought under political control – in addition to an order chamber, for example, a state tribunal to elect all judges – to legislate for them. Poland ignores these ECJ rulings and has not yet submitted a draft law to correct the removal of the rule of law.
On the contrary, according to recent reports by Kaczynski and Attorney General Gjibnik Geopro, there are already laws in place to end the “anarchy in the courts of Poland today” (in other words, the judiciary to overrule politics. Applied to the ruling court – one million euros a day is under discussion.Of course, Poland could easily impose fines on itself if the EU pays other billions from the EU budget to Warsaw from the EU budget.
Poland and Hungary help each other
At European heads of state and government councils on Thursday and Friday, Poland is not on the official agenda, but some prime ministers, such as Dutchman Mark Rutte, are expected to raise the issue. Patience with Poland is coming to an end. On the other hand, President Angela Merkel is known to continue to rely on dialogue. He called the parliamentary threat of legal action “sad.” He advised against using the method of law now. One reason: when the mechanism was adopted last year, the governments of Poland and Hungary promised to implement it only after the European Court of Human Rights had given its legal verdict. That should take a few more weeks.
The Commission wants to protect itself. Unlike Hungary, Poland is not a corrupt country. That is why it is difficult to justify the practice as valid before the ECJ. If so, it should be used against Hungary and some other Central and Eastern European countries. This will lead to unity among the states concerned. Because Poland and Hungary support each other, the so-called Article 7 measures against Poland and Hungary – which will end with the revocation of voting rights – seem hopeless.
The Commission may initiate new violation proceedings. At present, however, it appears that this will prevent funding from the Corona Reconstruction Fund (RRF). Payments have been linked to “milestones” for Poland in order to restore the rule of law. For Poland, a total of at least ில்லியன் 36 billion is at risk.
“Social media maven. Amateur food buff. Pop culture trailblazer. Tv ninja.”