The adopted resolution primarily focuses on the paralysis of the Constitutional Tribunal and on the dialogue initiated by the European Commission to find a solution with the Polish government. The Parliament fully supports the Commission’s initiative and action in this respect. It also calls on the Commission to monitor the follow-up by Polish authorities to its recommendations.
However, there is no mention of further steps that, in case of unsatisfactory response by the authorities, could result in a suspension of Poland’s voting rights in the Council.
Besides the main criticisms of the functioning of the Constitutional Tribunal, the resolution highlights MEPs’ concern related to legislative developments in other areas, such as media freedom, right to privacy, right to a fair trial and women’s rights.
Dominika Bychawska-Siniarska, a lawyer and board member of Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights, expressed concern that “the resolution will not change much. There is little will from the government to listen to international bodies’ advice. The ruling party has to understand that Europe is not against PiS, it is against the speed of reforms, lack of consultations and their impact on human rights and rule of law.”
“The new resolution focuses on other legislative acts, that constitute a serious threat to fundamental rights protection and that were adopted due to the Constitutional Court crisis. The thematic scope of the resolution reflects well, the problems with human rights protection we face, lack of free and independent public service media, anti-terror law interfering with citizens’ privacy, manual steering of the prosecution by the executive power and restriction in assemblies are only few examples.”
The resolution, and concerns about human rights and rule of law were debated by MEPs in the European Parliament on Tuesday 13.
During the plenary, MEPs underlined the need for the EU to hold its Member States accountable for their violation of fundamental rights and the rule of law. The President of the Socialist and Democrats group, Gianni Pittella remarked: “There is a tendency to reduce fundamental rights and to create some kind of illiberal democracy [in reference to the qualification used by the Hungarian Prime Minister, Viktor Orbán, to speak about the reforms led by his government]. There are measures taken by the Polish government that threaten the rule of law and this is why it is our duty to act”.
Commission Vice-President, Frans Timmermans reminded the Parliament that “upholding the rule of law is our joint responsibility, one that we all share: Commission, Member States, Council and this house”.
Sophie in ‘t Veld, a Dutch member of the Liberal group underlined that it is important for the EU to possess the necessary tools to be able to scrutinise on regular basis Member States’ compliance with the rule of law and fundamental rights. Although this is not the first time the European Parliament targets one particular country, it regularly faces accusations of selectivity, double standards and interference in States’ internal affairs by its detractors.
Members of the Polish Law and Justice (Prawo i Sprawiedliwość PiS) party and far-right political groups continuously suggested that the European Parliament was overstepping its bounds by intervening in the politics of Poland. Barbara Spinelli, an Italian MEP, argued the contrary: “I don’t think that we are interfering in Polish affairs. We are recalling that there are standards that everybody has signed up to by ratifying the treaties”.
“The resolution is not quite as strong as it needed to be, clearly favouring continued dialogue rather than action. It did however send a message of support to those raising concerns within Poland. It also underlined the need for Poland to have public debate without threats or accusations of being anti-polish directed at those critical of the current government’s policies.” commented Florian Irminger, HRHF’s Head of Advocacy.
Constitutional crisis
The “constitutional crisis” in Poland started in autumn 2015 when the newly elected president refused to swear into office the judges appointed to the Constitutional Tribunal by the previous parliament, arguing that the appointments were unconstitutional. In December 2015, the newly elected parliament appointed five new judges to the Constitutional Tribunal. The parliament did not wait for the tribunal’s ruling on whether the initially appointed judges had been appointed based on law in compliance with the Polish Constitution. The president immediately swore the five new judges into office. Furthermore, at the end of 2015, the parliament adopted the new Act on the Constitutional Tribunal.
Laws enabling the government to nominate the heads of public service television and radio were also introduced in the “small media reform” in 2015. Since December, it is estimated that over 130 employees of public service media have left or have been dismissed.
Protests followed in December with thousands of people demonstrating on the streets of Warsaw and other cities. While these changes and subsequent changes and amendments to other laws have been criticized by international bodies, and both foreign and domestic experts as threatening the rule of law and human rights in Poland.
The Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights has reported that the trend in Poland is that “the governing majority seeks to change the entire system of the state without, however, changing the constitution”.
Increased powers for police surveillance were introduced in June 2016 by the government with a new law relating to anti-terrorism. The law would also allow the court to block access to websites/online content for up to 30 days. The Venice Commission issued an opinion stating the law lacks sufficient safeguards to prevent “excessive use and unjustified interference with individual privacy.”
Reactions from the international community
European international bodies have reacted several times throughout 2016 beginning in January when the European Parliament held a debate featuring Polish prime minster Beata Szydlo which was followed by a resolution in April.
The Venice commission adopted a report on 11 March on the constitutional crisis following a visit to Poland in February.
The European Commission adopted, on 1 June an opinion on the rule of law in Poland, an 18-page long text which detailed concerns about the appointment of judges, the government not recognizing the rulings of the tribunal, and the functionality of the court.
On 6 June, the Council of Europe published the conclusions of an expert dialogue between the Polish government and two experts appointed by CoE. The opinion of the experts assessed the compatibility of a draft “Big Media Law Package” relating to the Polish public service media.
The Venice Commission issued an opinion on 13 June regarding amendments to the Police Act. It announced that it believed Poland’s current surveillance powers to be too broad.
The Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe published on 15 June, a report regarding his visit to Poland from 9 to 12 February 2016.
The European Commission, on 27 July, also issued a list of recommendations to Poland which it did subsequently make public. It gave Poland three months to solve the threats to the rule of law under pain of potential sanctions.
The Polish government responded by adopting a new act on the constitutional tribunal in an effort to address issues raised by the commission, however the conclusion of the commission was that “the fundamental concerns are still unresolved. This new law did not address the threat to the rule of law in Poland.”
Poland has until the end of October to answer the recommendations of the European Commission.
“Failure to do so could lead to the Council invoking article 7 procedure, which is something the Parliament should have more clearly called for in its resolution,” said Florian Irminger.
“Against the backdrop of these reactions – and by now the second European Parliament resolution on Poland already, reality is that the ‘illiberal democracy’ model is inspiring more and more. Today it is Poland inspired by Hungary; Croatia’s previous government failed thanks to resistance. Many others in power believe that the answers to the challenges they face is to restrict rights of minorities and attack the pillars of the democratic system. Today’s resolution is a signal against such developments in Europe – and the European Parliament must stand firm in addressing them”, further commented Florian Irminger.
Related
Human Rights House Foundation
Rule of law under threat in Poland
Constitutional crisis in Poland threatens rule of law
Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights
http://www.hfhr.pl/en/constitutional-tribunal-act-the-monitoring-of-legislative-amendments/
