The First Episode in the Romanian Rule of Law Saga: Joined Cases C-83/19, C-127/19, C-195/19, C-291/19, C-355/19 and C-397/19, Asociaţia ‘Forumul Judecătorilor din România, and their follow-up at the national level
|Článek v odborném periodiku
|Časopis / Zdroj
|European Constitutional Law Review
|Fakulta / Pracoviště MU
|Open access časopisu
|Romanian Rule; Cases C-83/19; C-127/19; C-195/19; C-291/19; C-355/19 and C-397/19
|In the Asociaţia ‘Forumul Judecătorilor din România’ joined cases,Footnote 1 referred to throughout this case note as AFJR, the Court of Justice of the EU was asked to assess whether the reformed disciplinary, civil and criminal liability of magistrates introduced in Romania during 2017-2019 may affect the Romanian judiciary’s capacity to adjudicate independently, and comply with the EU rule of law values. This judgment is of fundamental importance to the legal order of the EU as it analyses for the first time the legal nature and effects of key EU instruments used to ensure the accession of new member states to the EU and rule of law monitoring: the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism Decision (hereafter CVM Decision)Footnote2 and the European Commission Reports monitoring Romania’s progress on the rule of law under this Mechanism. The case brings an important contribution to the Court of Justice rule of law approach by, first, introducing the principle of progression towards achieving EU rule of law standards as set out in the CVM Decision and Commission Reports. Second, the Court of Justice sets out similar judicial independence parameters for all types of judicial liability regimes, beyond the disciplinary one which has repeatedly appeared in the Polish case law. The judgment will also be remembered as a strong restatement of the legally binding principle of primacy of EU law for constitutional courts.