A (ausência) de consequências em caso de dúvida razoável sobre a independência do sistema judicial na cooperação em matéria penal na União Europeia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v8i1.689Palavras-chave:
Estado de Direito na Polônia, cooperação judicial em processo penal, mandado de detenção europeu, independência do Judiciário, jurisprudência do TJUEResumo
O artigo analisa as consequências da violação à independência judicial no caso de cooperação em matéria criminal. O direito a um juízo independente não é somente um valor fundamental do Estado de Direito (art. 2, Tratado da União Europeia, art. 19(1)), mas também um dos direitos fundamentais (art. 47, Carta dos Direitos Fundamentais da União Europeia). A violação da independência do Judiciário em um país da UE deve impactar na possibilidade de cooperação em matéria criminal. Considerando o standard de independência do Judiciário a partir da jurisprudência do TEDH, o artigo resume a atual jurisprudência do TJUE relacionada à independência do Judiciário e à imparcialidade dos juízes em dois níveis: geral (ou sistêmico), e em conexão com a operação do mandado de detenção europeu. O artigo examina a situação na Polônia e os julgamentos recentes do TJUE nos “casos da Polônia” – sobre o problema de executar o mandado de detenção europeu e avaliar a independência do sistema judicial na Polônia.
Downloads
Referências
Literature
ANAGNOSTARAS, Georgios, Mutual confidence is not blind trust! Fundamental rights protection and the execution of the European arrest warrant: Aranyosi and Caldararu, Common Market Law Review, 2016, v. 53, No. 6. https://doi.org/10.54648/cola2016146
BEDNER, Adriaan, An Elementary Approach to the Rule of Law, Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 2010, v. 2, No 1. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1876404510100037
BIERNAT, Stanisław, FILIPEK, Paweł, The Assessment of Judicial Independence Following the CJEU Ruling in C-216/18 LM, [w:] Armin von BOGDANDY, Piotr BOGDANOWICZ, Iris CANOR, Christoph GRABENWARTER, Maciej TABOROWSKI, Matthias SCHMIDT (eds.), Defending Checks and Balances in EU Member States. Taking Stock of Europe’s Actions, Springer 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-62317-6_16
von BOGDANDY, Armin, Ways to Frame the European Rule of Law: Rechtsgemeinschaft, Trust, Revolution, and Kantian Peace, European Constitutional Law Review 2018, Volume 14, Issue 4. https://doi.org/10.1017/s157401961800041x
von BOGDANDY Armin, DIMITRIOS SPIEKER Luke, Countering the Judicial Silencing of Critics: Article 2 TEU Values, Reverse Solange, and the Responsibilities of National Judges, European Constitutional Law Review 2019, Volume 15, Issue 3. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1574019619000324
BOGDANOWICZ, Piotr, TABOROWSKI Maciej, Piotr BOGDANOWICZ, Brak niezależności sądów krajowych jako uchybienie zobowiązaniu w rozumieniu art. 258 TFUE (cz. I), Europejski Przegląd Sądowy, 2018, No, 1
BOGDANOWICZ, Piotr, TABOROWSKI Maciej, Regulacje dotyczące stanu spoczynku jako narzędzie służące odsunięciu określonej grupy sędziów od pełnienia urzędu na stanowisku sędziego Sądu Najwyższego – uwagi na tle wyroku Trybunału Sprawiedliwości z 24.06.2019 r., C-619/18, Komisja Europejska przeciwko Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej, Europejski Przegląd Sądowy, 2019, No. 12
BOVEND'EERDT, Koen, The Joined Cases Aranyosi and Caldararu: A New Limit to the Mutual Trust Presumption in the Area of Freedom, Security, and Justice¸ Utrecht Journal of International and European Law, 2016, v. 32. https://doi.org/10.5334/ujiel.337
FILIPEK, Paweł, Nieusuwalność sędziów i granice kompetencji państwa członkowskiego do regulowania krajowego wymiaru sprawiedliwości – uwagi w świetle wyroku Trybunału Sprawiedliwości z 24.06.2019 r., C-619/18, Komisja Europejska przeciwko Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej, Europejski Przegląd Sądowy, 2019, No. 12
FRĄCKOWIAK-ADAMSKA, Agnieszka, Drawing Red Lines with No (Significant) Bites: Why an Individual Test Is Not Appropriate in the LM Case, [w:] Armin von BOGDANDY, Piotr BOGDANOWICZ, Iris CANOR, Christoph GRABENWARTER, Maciej TABOROWSKI, Matthias SCHMIDT (eds.), Defending Checks and Balances in EU Member States. Taking Stock of Europe’s Actions, Springer 2021, p. 448-449.
FRĄCKOWIAK-ADAMSKA, Agnieszka, Granice wzajemnego zaufania w Przestrzeni Wolności, Bezpieczeństwa i Sprawiedliwości, Europejski Przegląd Sądowy, 2014, No. 2
GRABOWSKA-MOROZ, Barbara, ŚNIADACH, Olga, The Role of Civil Society in Protecting Judicial Independence in Times of Rule of Law Backsliding in Poland, Utrecht Law Review, 2021, v. 17, No. 2. https://doi.org/10.36633/ulr.673
GRZELAK, Agnieszka, SAKOWICZ, Andrzej, Wymóg niezależności sądu krajowego jako element skutecznej ochrony sądowej (uwagi na tle wyroku TS z 19.11.2019 r. dla polskiego wymiaru sprawiedliwości, Państwo i Prawo 2020, No. 5
GRZELAK, Agnieszka, Wzajemne zaufanie jako podstawa współpracy sądów państw członkowskich UE w sprawach karnych (uwagi na marginesie odesłania prejudycjalnego w sprawie C-216/18 PPU Celmer), Państwo i Prawo, 2018, No 10
GUTMANN, Jerg, VOIGT, Stefan, Judicial independence in the EU: a puzzle, European Journal of Law and Economics, 2020, v. 49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-018-9577-8
JASIŃSKI, Wojciech, Bezstronność sądu i jej gwarancje w polskim procesie karnym, Wolters Kluwer, Warszawa 2009
KAMIŃSKI, Ireneusz C, Unijna zasada praworządności (państwa prawa) i uprawnienia sądów, [w] Łukasz BOJARSKI, Krzysztof GRAJEWSKI, Jan KREMER, Gabriela OTT, Waldemar ŻUREK, Konstytucja, praworządność, władza sądownicza, Wolters Kluwer, 2019, Warszawa
KRAJEWSKI, Michał, Associação Sindical dos Juízes Portugueses: The Court of Justice and Athena's Dilemma, European Papers Vol. 3, 2018, No 1, pp. 395-40
KRYGIER, Martin, The Rule of Law: Legality, Teleology, Sociology, [in:] Gianluigi PALOMBELLA, Neil WALKER (eds.), Relocating the Rule of Law, Hart Publishers, Oxford, 2009. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472564634.ch-003
KUSAK, Martyna, Zasada wzajemnego zaufania a kryzys praworządności, [w:] Dominika CZERNIAK, Jerzy SKORUPKA, Europejskie gwarancje prawidłowego wymiaru sprawiedliwości w sprawach karnych, C.H. BECK, Warszawa 2021
ŁAZARSKA, Aneta, Refleksje na temat czynników „mrożących” europejski dialog prejudycjalny, Europejski Przegląd Sądowy, 2019, No. 12
LENAERTS, Koen, La vie après l’avis: Exploring the principle of mutual (yet not blind) trust, Common Market Law Rewiev, 2017, No. 3. https://doi.org/10.54648/cola2017061
LENAERTS, Koen, The Court of Justice and national courts: a dialogue based on mutual trust and judicial independence. http://www.nsa.gov.pl/download.php?id=753
LELOUP, Mathieu, The appointment of judges and the right to a tribunal established by law: The ECJ tightens its grip on issues of domestic judicial organization: Review Simpson, Common Market Law Review Volume 57, Issue 4 (2020). https://doi.org/10.54648/cola2020718
LELOUP, Mathieu, Who Safeguards the Guardians? A Subjective Right of Judges to their Independence under Article 6(1) ECHR, European Constitutional Law Review, Volume 17, Issue 3, September 2021. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1574019621000286
LIMBACH, Jutta Judicial Independence: Law and Practise and Appointments to the European Court of Human Rights, Interights 2003
Media informed about the disciplinary proceedings initiated against judges Synakiewicz and Pilśnik for following the principle of priority of the EU law; https://www.rp.pl/sady-i-trybunaly/art19006211-izba-dyscyplinarna-ma-zdecydowac-o-losie-sedziow-synakiewicza-i-pilsnik (accessed: 6.02.2022).
MIKŁASZEWICZ, Przemysław, Niezależność sądów i niezawisłość sędziów w kontekście zasady rządów prawa – zasadniczy element funkcjonowania UE w świetle orzecznictwa TSUE, Państwo i Prawo, 2018, No. 3
MITSILEGAS, Valsamis, EU Criminal Law after Lisbon, Bloomsbury Publishing 2016
MROWICKI, Marcin, Niezależność od władzy wykonawczej jako warunek uznania za „organ sądowy” – glosa do wyroku Trybunału Sprawiedliwości z 24.11.2020 r., C-510/19, Openbaar Ministerie, YU, ZV przeciwko AZ, Europejski Przegląd Sądowy 2021, No. 6,
OSTROPOLSKI, Tomasz, Pojęcie organu sądowego w ramach współpracy wymiarów sprawiedliwości w sprawach karnych, Europejski Przegląd Sądowy 2019, no. 9
PALOMBELLA, Gianluigi, The Rule of Law and Its Core [in:] Gianluigi PALOMBELLA, Neil WALKER (eds.), Relocating the Rule of Law, Hart Publishers, Oxford, 2009. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472564634.ch-002
PECH, Laurent, KOCHENOV, Dimitry, Strengthening the Rule of Law Within the European Union: Diagnoses, Recommendations, and What to Avoid, https://reconnect-europe.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/RECONNECT-policy-brief-Pech-Kochenov-2019June-publish.pdf
PECH, Laurent, WACHOWIEC, Patryk, MAZUR, Dariusz, Poland’s Rule of Law Breakdown: A Five-Year Assessment of EU’s (In)Action, Hague Journal on the Rule of Law, 2021, v. 13
Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of the Union's budget in case of generalised deficiencies as regards the rule of law in the Member States; COM/2018/324 final - 2018/0136 (COD)
RAKOWSKA-TRELA, Anna, Krajowa Rada Sądownictwa po wejściu w życiu nowelizacji z 8.12.2017 r. – organ nadal konstytucyjny czy pozakonstytucyjny, [w] Łukasz BOJARSKI, Krzysztof GRAJEWSKI, Jan KREMER, Gabriela OTT, Waldemar ŻUREK, Konstytucja, praworządność, władza sądownicza, Wolters Kluwer, 2019, Warszawa
SKUCZYŃSKI, Paweł, Postawy prawników wobec kryzysu konstytucyjnego a niezawisłość sędziowska, Krajowa Rada Sądownictwa, [w:] Grzegorz BORKOWSKI (ed.), Granice niezawisłości sędziów i niezależności sądów?, Warszawa-Toruń 2016, p. 149-166.
SPANO, Robert, The rule of law as the lodestar of the European Convention on Human Rights: The Strasbourg Court and the independence of the judiciary, European Law Journal, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1111/eulj.12377
ŚWIĄTKOWSKI, Andrzej Marian, Unijna koncepcja praworządności. Wyrok Trybunału Sprawiedliwości Unii Europejskiej w sprawie C-791/19 – Skuteczna ochrona sądowa – Komisja Europejska przeciwko Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej, Przegląd Sądowy, 2021, No. 10
Regional Court in Warsaw (Letter of 26 September 2018). http://bip.warszawa.so.gov.pl/attachments/download/7511 (accessed: 6.02.2022).
Court of Justice Judgments
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 22 February 2022, C‑562/21 PPU i C‑563/21 PPU, X and Y
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 21 December 2021; Criminal proceedings against PM and Others, C-357/19, C-379/19, C-547/19, C-811/19 and C-840/19,
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 16 November 2021, C‑748/19, C‑749/19, C‑750/19, C‑751/19, C‑752/19, C‑753/19, C‑754/19, Prokuratura Rejonowa w Mińsku Mazowieckim,
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 6 October 2021, C‑487/19, WŻ
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 18 May 2021, C-83/19 etc, Forum of Romanian Judges
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 2 March 2021, C-824/18, AB and the Others
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 20 April 2021, C‑896/19 Repubblika,
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 17 December 2020, C‑354/20 PPU and C‑412/20 PPU, L and P
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 26 March 2020 r., C‑542/18 RX‑II i C‑543/18 RX‑II Simpson/Council and HG/Commision
COURT OF JUTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 26 March 2020, C‑558/18 and C‑563/18, Miasto Łowicz
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 19 November 2019, C-585/18, C-624/18, C-625/18, AK and Others
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 15 July 2021, C‑791/19, European Commission v. Poland.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 24 June 2019, C‑619/18, European Commission v Republic of Poland
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 27 May 2019, C‑508/18 and C‑82/19 PPU, OG and PI,
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 25 July 2018, C-216/18 PPU, LM
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 27 February 2018, C-64/16, Associação Sindical dos Juízes Portugueses
COURT OF JUTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 28 March 2017 r., C-72/15, PJSC Rosnefit Oil Company v. Her Majesty’s Treasury and others
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 5 April 2016, C‑404/15 i C‑659/15 PPU, Aranyosi and Căldăraru.
COURT OF JUTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 26 February 2013, C‑399/11, Stefano Melloni v Ministerio Fiscal.
COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Judgment (Grand Chamber) of 19 September 2006, C‑506/04, Wilson
Opinion of Advocate General
OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL EVGENI TANCHEV delivered on 28 June 2018, C‑216/18 PPU, LM,
OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL MICHAEL BOBEK delivered on 4 March 2021; C‑357/19 and C‑547/19
ORDER OF THE VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE COURT of 27 October 2021, C‑204/21 R.
OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL ATHANASIOS RANTOS delivered of 16 December 2021, C‑562/21 PPU and C‑563/21, X and Y
Downloads
Publicado
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2022 Dominika Czerniak
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Os direitos autorais dos artigos publicados são do autor, com direitos do periódico sobre a primeira publicação, impressa e/ou digital.
Os autores somente poderão utilizar os mesmos resultados em outras publicações indicando claramente este periódico como o meio da publicação original. Se não houver tal indicação, considerar-se-á situação de auto-plágio.
- Portanto, a reprodução, total ou parcial, dos artigos aqui publicados fica sujeita à expressa menção da procedência de sua publicação neste periódico, citando-se o volume e o número dessa publicação, além do link DOI para referência cruzada. Para efeitos legais, deve ser consignada a fonte de publicação original.
Por se tratar de periódico de acesso aberto, permite-se o uso gratuito dos artigos em aplicações educacionais e científicas desde que citada a fonte, conforme a licença da Creative Commons.
A partir de 2022, os artigos publicados na RDPP estão licenciados com uma Licença Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional. Os artigos puliicados até 2021 adotaram a Licença Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial 4.0 Internacional.
---------------
Arquivamento e distribuição
Permite-se sem restrições o arquivamento do PDF final publicado, em qualquer servidor de acesso aberto, indexador, repositório ou site pessoal, como Academia.edu e ResearchGate.
Como Citar
