Attack or reform
Systemic interventions in the judiciary in Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1393Palabras clave:
Central and Eastern Europe,, judicial independence, attack and reform, accountability of the judiciary, Slovak reform of the judiciary 2020, Europa Central y del Este, independencia judicial, reforma judicial eslovaca 2020, ataque y reformaResumen
¿Es acaso posible distinguir si un gobierno está dispuesto a eliminar su responsabilidad o si aspira a la confianza pública o al crecimiento de la eficacia? Por otro lado, ¿qué elementos de las acciones del gobierno diferencian una crítica válida de un ataque a la independencia del poder judicial? Este documento propone un enfoque original para reconocer un ataque al poder judicial. Mientras que los enfoques anteriores se centraban en la motivación del reformador, la adhesión a las normas internacionales o el requisito del “tribunal establecido por la ley”, este enfoque busca un núcleo de independencia judicial y lo encuentra en las condiciones suficientes para la decisión libre e imparcial de un juez. En el documento, los cambios en Hungría y Polonia se compararán con la reforma judicial eslovaca desde 2020. Si bien después de tres décadas de la caída del socialismo de Estado, Hungría, Polonia y Eslovaquia se enfrentan a problemas similares de retroceso del Estado de Derecho y populismo emergente, en Eslovaquia se observan diferentes motivaciones, interpretaciones y resultados de las reformas judiciales.
Descargas
Metrics
Downloads:
13_2_Curos_OSLS (English) 478
XML_13_2_Curos_OSLS (English) 363
Citas
Act CLI of 2011 on the Constitutional Court. European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), CDL-REF(2012)017 of 9 May 2012 [online]. Available from: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-REF(2012)017-e [Access 31 January 2023].
Act CLXI of 2011 on the Organization and Administration of the Courts. European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), CDL-REF(2012)057 of 23 Aug. 2021 [online]. Available from: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-REF(2021)057-e [Access 31 January 2023].
Act CLXII of 2011 on the Legal Status and Remuneration of Judges. European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), CDL-AD(2011)016 of 20 Jun. [online]. Available from: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-REF(2012)006-e [Access 31 January 2023].
aw/PAP, 2017. Zbigniew Ziobro: Nie cofnę się w walce o sprawiedliwość. WNP.PL [online], 18 April. Available from: https://perma.cc/E4T9-PNYR [Access 11 October 2021].
Balog, B., 2014. Materiálne jadro Ústavy Slovenskej republiky (The Substantive Core of the Constitution of the Slovak Republic). Eurokódex.
Balogh, E.S., 2019. Soon Enough, Hungarian Judicial Independence Will Exist Only in History Books. Hungarian Spectrum [online], 24 April. Available from: https://hungarianspectrum.org/2019/04/24/soon-enough-hungarian-judicial-independence-will-exist-only-in-history-books/ [Access 17 June 2021].
Bencze, M., 2021. Judicial Populism and the Weberian Judge—The Strength of Judicial Resistance Against Governmental Influence in Hungary. German Law Journal, 22(7), 1282–1297.
Blisa, A., and Kosař, D., 2018. Court Presidents: The Missing Piece in the Puzzle of Judicial Governance. German Law Journal, 19(7), 2031–2076.
Breichová-Lapčáková, M., 2013. Ústava a ústavné zákony [The Constitution and Constitutional Statutes]. Bratislava: Kalligram.
Bugarič, B., and Ginsburg, T., 2016. The assault on postcommunist courts. Journal of Democracy, 27(3), 69–82.
Commissioner for Human Rights, 2012. Hungary: Legislative changes threaten democracy and human rights [online]. Strasbourg, 12 January. Available from: https://www.coe.int/en/web/commissioner/-/hungary-legislative-changes-threaten-democracy-and-human-rights [Access 31 January 2023].
Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE), 2007. Opinion no. 10, To the attention of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the Council for the Judiciary at the service of society [online]. 23 November. Available from: https://rm.coe.int/168074779b [Access 31 January 2023].
Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE), 2010. Magna Carta of Judges (CCJE (2010)3 Final) [online]. Strasbourg, 17 November. Available from: https://rm.coe.int/16807482c6 [Access 31 January 2023].
Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE), 2020. Opinion of the CCJE Bureau following a request by the CCJE member in respect of Slovakia as regards the reform of the judiciary in Slovakia. CCJE-BU(2020)3 of 9 Dec. [online]. Available from: https://www.coe.int/en/web/ccje/news/-/asset_publisher/8Wd6RJfyNLaO/content/the-ccje-publishes-an-opinion-about-the-new-provisions-relating-to-the-judicial-council-of-slovakia [Access 10 October 2021].
Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE), 2022. CCJE Opinions and Magna Carta. Strasbourg: Directorate General Human Rights and Rule of Law [online]. Available from: https://www.coe.int/en/web/ccje/ccje-opinions-and-magna-carta [Access 31 January 2023].
Council of Europe, 2011. Judges: Independence, Efficiency and Responsibilities. Recommendation CM/Rec(2010)12 and Explanatory Memorandum [online]. Available from: https://rm.coe.int/16807096c1 [Access 31 January 2023].
Čuroš, P., and Graver, H.P., 2020. Dissimilar Similarities. Verfassungsblog [online], 26 November. Available from: https://verfassungsblog.de/dissimilar-similarities/ [Access 31 January 2023].
Davies, C., 2018. Hostile Takeover: How law and justice captured Poland’s courts. Freedom House.
Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers, 2020. 2020 Rule of law report - Communication and country chapters [online]. 30 September. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/2020-rule-law-report-communication-and-country-chapters_en [Access 26 October 2022].
Domin, M., 2019. A Part of the Constitution Is Unconstitutional, the Slovak Constitutional Court has Ruled. Verfassungsblog [online], 8 February. Available from: https://verfassungsblog.de/a-part-of-the-constitution-is-unconstitutional-the-slovak-constitutional-court-has-ruled/ [Access 31 January 2023].
Drinóczi, T., and Bień-Kacala, A., 2019. Illiberal constitutionalism: The case of Hungary and Poland. German Law Journal, 20(8), 1140–1166.
Drugda, S., 2019. Slovak Constitutional Court Strikes down a Constitutional Amendment–But the Amendment Remains Valid. I-CONnectblog [online]. April. Available from: http://www.iconnectblog.com/2019/04/slovak-constitutional-court-strikes-down-a-constitutional-amendment-but-the-amendment-remains-valid/ [Access 31 January 2023].
Drugda, S., 2020. On Collision Course with the Material Core of the Slovak Constitution. Verfassungsblog [online], 3 December. Available from: https://verfassungsblog.de/on-collision-course-with-the-material-core-of-the-slovak-constitution/ [Access 13 June 2022].
European Networks of Councils for the Judiciary (ENCJ), 2017. Independence, Accountability and Quality of the Judiciary: ENCJ Report 2016–2017 [online]. Available from: https://www.encj.eu/images/stories/pdf/workinggroups/independence/encj_report_ia_ga_adopted_ga_13_6.pdf [Access 31 January 2023].
Fleck, Z., 2021. Changes of the Political and Legal Systems: Judicial Autonomy. German Law Journal, 22(7), 1298–1315.
Foucault, M., 2010. The Government of Self and Others: Lectures at the Collège de France 1982–1983. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Gajda-Roszczynialska, K., and Markiewicz, K., 2020. Disciplinary proceedings as an instrument for breaking the rule of law in Poland. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 1–33.
Gardos-Orosz, F., 2021. Two Influential Concepts: Socialist Legality and Constitutional Identity and Their Impact on the Independence of the Judiciary. German Law Journal, 22(7), 1327–1343.
Halmai, G., 2012. From the “Rule of Law Revolution” to the Constitutional Counter-Revolution in Hungary. In: W. Bedenek, ed., European Yearbook of Human Rights. Cambridge/Brussels: Intersentia.
Halmai, G., 2019. Populism, authoritarianism and constitutionalism. German law journal, 20(3), 296–313.
Hammarberg, T., 2011. [Letter addressed to the Hungarian Minister for Foreign Affairs] CommHR/GC/sf 112-2011 [online]. Strasbourg: Commissioner for Human Rights, 16 December. Available from: https://rm.coe.int/16806db8b1 [Access 31 January 2023].
IACL-AIDC Blog, 2020. Judicial Reform in Slovakia: How to deal with “bad” judges? IACL-IADC Blog [online]. Available from: https://blog-iacl-aidc.org/2020-posts/2020/7/30/judicial-reform-in-slovakia-how-to-deal-with-bad-judges [Access 7 February 2022].
International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH), 2016. Hungary: Democracy under Threat [online]. Available from: https://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/hungary_democracy_under_threat.pdf [Access 31 January 2023].
Kelemen, R.D., and Pech, L., 2018. Why autocrats love constitutional identity and constitutional pluralism. (Working Paper no. 2) [online]. September. Reconnect. Available from: https://reconnect-europe.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/RECONNECT-WorkingPaper2-Kelemen-Pech-LP-KO.pdf [Access 31 January 2023].
Koreň, M., 2022. Slovakia’s access to recovery plan money in jeopardy. Euractiv, 18 February.
Kosař, D., 2016. Perils of judicial self-government in transitional societies: holding the least accountable branch to account. Cambridge University Press.
Kosař, D., and Šipulová, K., 2018. The Strasbourg Court Meets Abusive Constitutionalism: Baka v. Hungary and the Rule of Law. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 10(1), 83–110.
Kosař, D., and Šipulová, K., 2020a. Court packing aneb jak obsadit soudy svymi lidmi. In: V. Šimíček, ed., Nezávislost soudní moci [Judicial Independence]. Leges, pp. 77-112.
Kosař, D., and Šipulová, K., 2020b. How to Fight Court-Packing? Constitutional Studies [online], 6(1), 133. Available from: https://constitutionalstudies.wisc.edu/index.php/cs/article/view/52 [Access 31 January 2023].
Kosař, D., and Spáč, S., 2021. Post-communist Chief Justices in Slovakia: From Transmission Belts to Semi-autonomous Actors? Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 13(1), 107–142.
Kovács, K., and Scheppele, K.L., 2018. The fragility of an independent judiciary: Lessons from Hungary and Poland—And the European Union. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 51(3), 189–200.
Kovács, Z., 2019. Hungarian government scraps concept of separate administrative courts. Index [online], 4 November. Available from: https://index.hu/english/2019/11/04/administrative_courts_scrapped/ [Access 31 January 2023].
Ľalík, T., 2017. Tracing constitutional changes in Slovakia between 2008–2016. Hungarian Journal of Legal Studies, 58(2), 117–138.
Láštic, E., 2020. What now? The failure of the independent judiciary in Slovakia. V4 Human Rights Review [online], 34. Available from: https://www.humanrightscentre.org/sites/default/files/attachement/bulletin/V4humanrightsreview_Q1_2020_0.pdf [Access 31 January 2023].
Mazur, D., and Żurek, W., 2018. So Called “Good Change” in the Polish System of the Administration of Justice.
Meszaros, L., 2020. Aktuálne otázky nezávislosti justície v Maďarsku. In: V. Šimíček, ed., Nezavislost soudni moci. Prague: Leges.
Moliterno, J.E., and Paton, P.D., 2014. Global Issues in Legal Ethics (2014). West Academic.
Moliterno, J.E., et al., 2018. Independence without accountability: the harmful consequences of EU policy toward central and eastern European entrants. Fordham international law journal [online], 42(2), 481. Available from: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ilj/vol42/iss2/7/ [Access 31 January 2023].
Mudde, C., and Kaltwasser, C.R., 2017. Populism: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.
Národná rada, 2020. Vládny návrh ústavného zákona, ktorým sa mení a dopĺňa Ústava Slovenskej republiky č. 460/1992 Zb. v znení neskorších predpisov [Explanatory report to proposal to constitutional act] (online). Available from: https://www.nrsr.sk/web/Default.aspx?sid=zakony/zakon&MasterID=7962 [Access 13 June 2021].
Orosz, L., 2005. K problémom kompatibility ústavného systému Slovenskej republiky’ (On the Problems of Compatibility of the Constitutional System of the Slovak Republic). Justičná revue, 57, 323–41.
Ovádek, M., 2018. Drama or Serenity? Upcoming Judicial Appointments at the Slovak Constitutional Court, n.d. Verfassungsblog [online], 29 January. Available from: https://verfassungsblog.de/drama-or-serenity-upcoming-judicial-appointments-at-the-slovak-constitutional-court/ [Access 9 June 2021].
Pech, L., and Scheppele, K.L., 2017. Illiberalism Within: Rule of Law Backsliding In The Eu. The Cambridge Yearbook of European Legal Studies, 19, 3–47.
Pech, L., Wachowiec, P., and Mazur, D., 2021. Poland’s rule of law breakdown: a five-year assessment of EU’s (in) action. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 1–43.
Preuss, O., 2016. Demokratickỳ právní stát tesanỳ do pískovce. Časopis pro právní vědu a praxi, 24(3), 365–376.
Prušová, V., 2020. Ústavný súd zrejme príde o kompetenciu, ktorú si sám privlastnil. Koalícia reaguje na kontroverzné rozhodnutie z minulosti. Denník N [online], 24 November. Available from: https://dennikn.sk/2156633/ustavny-sud-ma-prist-o-kompetenciu-ktoru-si-sam-privlastnil-koalicia-reaguje-na-kontroverzne-rozhodnutie-z-minulosti/ [Access 31 January 2023].
Prušová, V., 2022. Kolíková sa dočkala, súdna reforma na poslednú chvíľu prešla parlamentom. Denník N [online], 27 April. Available from: https://dennikn.sk/2823382/kolikova-sa-dockala-reforma-sudov-na-poslednu-chvilu-presla-parlamentom/?ref=list [Access 31 January 2023].
Raábová, M., 2018. Two witnesses talk about the corruption of a judge and state secretary. Spectator [online], 27 March. Available from: https://spectator.sme.sk/c/20790365/two-witnesses-talk-about-the-corruption-of-judge-and-state-secretary.html [Access 31 January 2023].
Sadurski, W., 2018. How democracy dies (in Poland): A case study of anti-constitutional populist backsliding. Revista Forumul Judecatorilor, 104.
Sadurski, W., 2019a. Poland’s Constitutional Breakdown. Oxford University Press.
Sadurski, W., 2019b. Polish constitutional tribunal under PiS: from an activist court, to a paralysed tribunal, to a governmental enabler. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 11(1), 63–84.
Sajó, A., 2021. Ruling by cheating: governance in illiberal democracy. Cambridge University Press.
Šípoš, G., and Spáč, S., 2013. Kto je s kỳm rodina na našich súdoch [Who Is Family in the Courts of Justice?]. Transparency International [online], 20 November. Available from: https://blog.sme.sk/transparency/spolocnost/kto-je-s-kym-rodina-na-nasich-sudoch [Access 31 January 2023].
Śledzińska-Simon, A., 2018. The rise and fall of judicial self-government in Poland: on judicial reform reversing democratic transition. German Law Journal, 19(7), 1839–1870.
Spectator staff, 2019a. Jankovská had judges on call for Kočner. Spectator [online], 3 October. Available from: https://spectator.sme.sk/c/22227698/jankovska-had-judges-on-call-for-kocner.html?ref=av-right [Access 31 January 2023].
Spectator staff, 2019b. Kočner’s judges: Who has stepped down because of Threema so far? (overview). Spectator [online], 5 November. Available from: https://spectator.sme.sk/c/22252665/kocner-judges-threema-resignations-overview-judiciary.html?ref=av-right [Access 31 January 2023].
Spectator staff, 2019c. Police seized mobile phones of judges and ex-state secretary due to corruption suspicions. Spectator [online], 9 September. Available from: https://spectator.sme.sk/c/22208042/police-seized-mobile-phones-of-judges-and-ex-state-secretary-due-to-corruption-suspicions.html?ref=tab [Access 31 January 2023].
Spectator staff, 2020a. Charges against judges show nobody is inviolable. Spectator [online], 11 March. Available from: https://spectator.sme.sk/c/22356338/charges-against-judges-show-nobody-is-inviolable.html?ref=tab [Access 31 January 2023].
Spectator staff, 2020b. Kočner’s judges charged and detained. Spectator [online], 11 March. https://spectator.sme.sk/c/22355425/kocners-judges-charged-and-detained.html?ref=av-left [Access 31 January 2023].
Spectator staff and TASR, 2019. Judge steps down for exchanging messages with Kočner. Spectator [online], 21 October. Available from: https://spectator.sme.sk/c/22241871/judge-stands-down-for-exchanging-messages-with-kocner.html?ref=av-right [Access 31 January 2023].
Súdna rada Slovenskej republiky, 2020. List predsedu Súdnej rady Slovenskej republiky prezidentke Konzultatívnej rady európskych sudcov [online]. Available from: https://www.sudnarada.gov.sk/list-predsedu-sudnej-rady-slovenskej-republiky-prezidentke-konzultativnej-rady-europskych-sudcov/ [Access 31 January 2023].
Szente, Z., 2021. Stepping Into the Same River Twice? Judicial Independence in Old and New Authoritarianism. German Law Journal, 22(7), 1316–1326.
TASR, 2022. Podľa riaditeľky Via Iuris je ohýbanie práva využívané ako nástroj nátlaku. Aktuality [online], 10 April. Available from: https://www.aktuality.sk/clanok/0LfEIrk/podla-riaditelky-via-iuris-je-ohybanie-prava-vyuzivane-ako-nastroj-natlaku/ [Access 31 January 2023].
Tatała, M., Rutynowka, E., and Wachowiec, P., 2020. Rule of law in Poland 2020: a Diagnosis of the deterioration of the Rule of Law form a comparative perspective. Warsaw: Civil Development Forum (FOR).
Tomoszek, M., 2010. Nezměnitelnost materiálního jádra ústavy jako řešení konfliktu ústavních hodnot. Časopis pro právní vědu a praxis, 18, 325–329.
Urbániková, M., and Haniková, L., 2021. Coping with the Murder: The Impact of Ján Kuciak’s Assassination on Slovak Investigative Journalists. Journalism Practice, 0(0), 1–21.
Valček, A., 2020. Why did the police move against judges? One of them collaborated. Spectator [online], 11 March. Available from: https://spectator.sme.sk/c/22355558/why-did-the-police-moved-against-judges-one-of-them-collaborated.html?ref=tab [Access 31 January 2023].
Venice Commission, 2010. Report on the independence of the judicial system part I: the independence of judges. CDL-AD(2010)004-e of 12-13 Mar. [online]. Available from: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL-AD(2010)004-e [Access 31 January 2023].
Venice Commission, 2011. Opinion on the new Constitution of Hungary, Adopted by the Venice Commission at its 87th Plenary Session (CDL-AD(2011)016 of 17–18 Jun. [online]. Available from: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2011)016-e [Access 31 January 2023].
Venice Commission, 2012. Opinion on Act CLXII of 2011 on the legal status and remuneration of judges and Act CLXI of 2011 on the organization and administration of courts of Hungary. CDL-AD(2012)001 of 19 Mar. [online]. Available from: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2012)001-e [Access 31 January 2023].
Venice Commission, 2016. Draft opinion on amendments to the act of 25 June 2015 on the Constitutional Tribunal of Poland. CDL(2016)003, Opinion no. 833/2015 of 26 Feb. [online]. Available from: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL(2016)003-e [Access 25 May 2021].
Venice Commission, 2017. Poland, Opinion on the Act on the Public Prosecutor’s Office. DL-AD(2017)028 of 11 Dec. 2017.
Venice Commission, 2020. Poland, Joint Urgent Opinion of the Venice Commission and the Directorate General of Human Rights and Rule of Law (DGI) of the Council of Europe on amendments to the Law on the Common courts, the Law on the Supreme court and some other Laws. CDL-AD(2020)017 of 16 Jan. 2020.
Venice Commission, 2021. Hungary. Opinion on the amendments to the act on the organisation and administration of the courts and the act on the legal status and remuneration of judges adopted by the Hungarian parliament in December 2020, CDL-AD(2021)036 of 16 Oct. 2021.
von Bogdandy, A., et al., 2018. Guest Editorial: A potential constitutional moment for the European rule of law – The importance of red lines. Common Market Law Review [online], 55. Available from: https://www.universiteitleiden.nl/binaries/content/assets/rechtsgeleerdheid/instituut-voor-publiekrecht/europees-recht/cml-rev.-vol.-55-no.-4-guest-editorial.pdf [Access 31 January 2023].
Wyrzykowski, M., 2019. Experiencing the Unimaginable: The Collapse of the Rule of Law in Poland. Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 11(2), 417–422.
Zoll, F., and Wortham, L., 2018. Judicial Independence and Accountability: Withstanding Political Stress in Poland. Fordham International Law Journal, 42(3), 875.
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2023 Peter Čuroš
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0.
Los autores conservan el copyright de sus trabajos, que se publicarán en OSLS bajo una licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento NoComercial SinObraDerivada. Puede consultar más detalles en: http://es.creativecommons.org/licencia/. Si no está de acuerdo con esta licencia, por favor, póngase en contacto con nosotros.
El autor concede los permisos necesarios para difundir la información bibliográfica del artículo, incluyendo el resumen, y autorizar a otros, incluyendo las bases de datos bibliográficas, de índices y servicios de alerta de contenidos, a copiar y comunicar esta información.
Para más información sobre los permisos para distribuir su artículo en cada fase de la producción, por favor, lea nuestra Política de Autoarchivo y Divulgación (en inglés).
Las condiciones de copyright con el nombre de autores y co-autores, y la licencia Creative Commons se mostrarán en el artículo. Estas condiciones se deben aceptar como parte del proceso de envío de un artículo a la revista. Por favor, asegúrese de que todos los co-autores se mencionan correctamente, y que entienden y aceptan estos términos.
