The controversial forced retirement of judges in Poland violates EU law, according to a renowned EU expert. The reform violated both the principle of indispensability of judges and their independence, according to Evgeni Tanchev, one of the eleven advocates-general of the European Court of Justice, in Luxembourg.
Following an interim injunction from the ECJ, the judges resumed their work last year. For the time being, the Polish Government reversed the law in question. Specifically, it is about a law with which Poland’s national conservative ruling party Law and Justice (PiS) lowered the retirement age of supreme magistrates from 70 to 65 years.
Reform as a remedy against unpopular judges?
Critics accused the government of wanting to get rid of unpopular judges with the reform. More than 20 lawyers had been retired through the reform. A possible extension of the retired judges had to be approved following the reform of President Andrzej Duda. The EU Commission responsible for prosecuting breaches of EU law has threatened the independence of the judiciary and sued the ECJ against the law.
Tanchev now emphasized that the non-dismissal of the judges was a major guarantee of their independence. He criticized the reform as capable of exposing the Supreme Court and its judges to outside interference and presidential pressure.
Loss of confidence of the public
Judges should only be suspended or removed from service if they are incapacitated for work or unfit for work due to their behavior. Early retirement is possible only at the request of the person concerned or for medical reasons. The sudden removal of a large number of judges also caused public confidence.
The assessment of an expert is not binding for the ECJ judges, but they often follow her. A verdict is expected in the coming months.
