natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Kommissionen anbefalede navnlig, at de polske myndigheder a) til fulde gennemfører forfatningsdomstolens afgørelser af 3. og 9. december 2015, ifølge hvilke de tre dommere, som på lovlig vis blev udpeget i oktober 2015 af Sejm i 7. valgperiode, kan påbegynde deres retlige hverv ved forfatningsdomstolen, og at de tre dommere, der blev udpeget af Sejm i 8. valgperiode uden gyldigt retsgrundlag, ikke påbegynder deres hverv b) kundgør og til fulde gennemfører forfatningsdomstolens afgørelser af 9. marts 2016 og sikrer, at kundgørelsen af kommende afgørelser sker automatisk og ikke er afhængig af en beslutning fra den udøvende eller lovgivende magt c) sikrer, at enhver reform af loven om forfatningsdomstolen er i overensstemmelse med forfatningsdomstolens afgørelser, herunder afgørelserne af 3. og 9. december 2015 og afgørelsen af 9. marts 2016, og tager hensyn til Venedigkommissionens udtalelse og sikrer, at effektiviteten af forfatningsdomstolen som garant for forfatningen ikke undergraves af betingelser d) sikrer, at forfatningsdomstolen kan prøve foreneligheden af den nye lov om forfatningsdomstolen af 22. juli 2016, inden den træder i kraft, og kundgør og fuldt ud gennemfører forfatningsdomstolens afgørelse i den forbindelse e) afstår fra handlinger og erklæringer, som kunne undergrave forfatningsdomstolens legitimitet og effektivitet.
In particular the Commission recommended that the Polish authorities: (a) implement fully the judgments of the Constitutional Tribunal of 3 and 9 December 2015 which require that the three judges that were lawfully nominated in October 2015 by the 7th term of the Sejm can take up their judicial functions in the Constitutional Tribunal, and that the three judges nominated by the 8th term of the Sejm without a valid legal basis do not take up their judicial functions; (b) publish and implement fully the judgments of the Constitutional Tribunal of 9 March 2016 and ensure that the publication of future judgments is automatic and does not depend on any decision of the executive or legislative powers; (c) ensure that any reform of the Law on the Constitutional Tribunal respects the judgments of the Constitutional Tribunal, including the judgments of 3 and 9 December 2015 and the judgment of 9 March 2016, and takes the Opinion of the Venice Commission fully into account; and ensure that the effectiveness of the Constitutional Tribunal as a guarantor of the Constitution is not undermined by requirements; (d) ensure that the Constitutional Tribunal can review the compatibility of the new law adopted on 22 July 2016 on the Constitutional Tribunal before its entry into force and publish and implement fully the judgment of the Tribunal in that respect; (e) refrain from actions and public statements which could undermine the legitimacy and efficiency of the Constitutional Tribunal.
Kommissionen opfordrede den polske regering til at løse de problemer, der er konstateret i henstillingen, inden for tre måneder, samt til at underrette Kommissionen om de tiltag, der iværksættes med henblik herpå.
The Commission invited the Polish Government to solve the problems identified in the Recommendation within 3 months, and to inform the Commission of the steps taken to that effect.
Kommissionen bemærkede, at den fortsat er rede til at føre en konstruktiv dialog med den polske regering.
The Commission noted that it remained ready to pursue a constructive dialogue with the Polish Government.
Den 30. juli 2016 undertegnede præsidenten loven af 22. juli 2016, der blev kundgjort i den polske statstidende den 1. august 2016.
On 30 July 2016, the President of the Republic signed the Law of 22 July 2016, which was published in the Official Journal on 1 August 2016.
, dommernes uafhængighed [6] og princippet om offentlige institutioners integritet og effektivitet [7].
The judgment held that a number of provisions of that law, all of which were also identified as a concern by the Commission in its Recommendation, were unconstitutional.
Den polske regering anerkendte dog ikke gyldigheden af denne afgørelse og kundgjorde den ikke i statstidende.
The grounds of unconstitutionality were notably the principles of the separation and balance of powers [5], the independence of courts and tribunals from other branches of power [5] Articles 38(3)-(6), 61(6), 83(2), 84-87 and 89 of the Law of 22 July 2016.
Den 18. august 2016 orienterede den polske anklagemyndighed om iværksættelsen af en strafferetlig undersøgelse mod formanden for forfatningsdomstolen for ikke have tilladt tre dommere, der var blevet udnævnt af den nye lovgivende forsamling i december 2015, at påbegynde deres hverv.
, the independence of judges [6] and the principle of integrity and efficiency of the public institutions [7].
Den 30. september 2016 fremlagde en gruppe af medlemmer af Sejm et nyt lovforslag om status for dommerne ved forfatningsdomstolen.
On 16 August 2016, the Polish Government published 21 judgments of the Tribunal rendered in a period from 6 April 2016 to 19 July 2016.
Forslaget indeholder bestemmelser om rettighederne og pligterne for dommerne ved forfatningsdomstolen, ordningerne for udnævnelse af dommere til forfatningsdomstolen, deres mandat og udtræden af tjenesten og spørgsmål vedrørende immunitet, personlig integritet og det disciplinære ansvar, de kan ifalde.
The publication of these judgments appears to have been based on Article 89 of the Law of 22 July 2016 which provided that ‘The Tribunal's rulings issued in breach of the provisions of the Constitutional Tribunal Act of 25 June 2015 before 20 July 2016 shall be published within 30 days from the entry into force of this Act, with the exception of rulings concerning normative acts that have ceased to have effect.’
Den 14. oktober 2016 vedtog Venedigkommissionen sin udtalelse om loven af 22. juli 2016 [9].
This provision was among those declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Tribunal in its judgment of 11 August 2016.
Det understreges også i udtalelsen, at problemet med udnævnelsen af dommere ikke er blevet løst som anbefalet, og at gennemførelsen af bestemmelsen i loven af 22. juli 2016 om, at formanden for forfatningsdomstolen skal tildele sager til de dommere, der blev udnævnt i december, ville være i strid medforfatningsdomstolens afgørelser, der er universelt bindende og dermed gælder for alle statslige myndigheder, herunder forfatningsdomstolen og dens formand.
Moreover, neither the judgments of 9 March 2016 and of 11 August 2016 nor the 16 judgments rendered since 11 August 2016 have been published by the Government.
Udtalelsen konkluderede, at det polske parlament ved at vedtage loven tillagde sig beføjelser til at foretage en revision af forfatningen, som den ikke havde, når den optrådte som den ordinære lovgivende forsamling.
On 18 August 2016, the Polish Prosecutor's Service informed about the launching of a criminal investigation against the President of the Constitutional Tribunal for not allowing three judges who had been appointed by the new legislature in December 2015 to take up their function.
Ved at forlænge forfatningskrisen lagde de hindringer i vejen for forfatningsdomstolen, der ifølge udtalelsen ikke kan udføre sin forfatningsmæssige rolle som vogter af demokratiet, retsstatsprincippet og menneskerettighederne.
The proposal contains provisions on the rights and obligations of judges of the Tribunal, the arrangements for appointing judges of the Tribunal, their mandate and termination of office and questions on immunity, personal integrity and liability to disciplinary action.
Den polske regering besluttede ikke at deltage i Venedigkommissionens møde den 14. oktober 2016, da den fandt, at udtalelsen fra Venedigkommissionen var ensidig og ikke tog hensyn til regeringens holdning.
On 14 October 2016, the Venice Commission adopted its opinion on the Law of 22 July 2016 [9].
Den 26. oktober 2016 fremlagde en gruppe medlemmer af Sejm et nyt lovforslag om forfatningsdomstolens organisation og de sager, den behandler.
The opinion noted that the Law contains some improvements as compared to the Law of 22 December 2015 which had been the subject matter of the opinion of the Venice Commission of March 2016.
Forslaget indeholder detaljerede bestemmelser om forfatningsdomstolens organisation og de sager, den behandler, herunder nye regler om valg af formanden og næstformanden for forfatningsdomstolen.
However, it considered that these improvements are too limited in scope, because other provisions of the Law as adopted would considerably delay and obstruct the work of the Tribunal, possibly make its work ineffective, as well as undermine its independence by exercising excessive legislative and executive control over its functioning.
Forslaget supplerer det lovforslag om status for dommerne ved forfatningsdomstolen, der blev fremlagt i Sejm den 30. september 2016 (se ovenfor).
Such other provisions include for example those on postponing a case for up to 6 months upon request by four judges, on allowing the Prosecutor-General to block a hearing by his or her absence, or on suspending all institutional cases for 6 months, followed by re-registration.
Begge lovforslag er nært knyttet til hinanden og har til formål at erstatte loven af 22. juli 2016.
The opinion also criticised the system of proposing candidates for the post of President of the Tribunal to the President of the Republic, which could lead to a situation that a candidate is appointed who does not enjoy the support of a substantial number of judges.
Den 27. oktober 2016 svarede den polske regering på Kommissionens henstilling inden den frist på tre måneder, der var fastsat heri.
Furthermore, without any constitutional or legal basis, the chancellery of the Prime Minister has purported to control the validity of judgments of the Tribunal by refusing to publish its judgments.
Svaret afviger på alle punkter fra den holdning, som der er givet udtryk for i henstillingen, og der bebudes ingen nye foranstaltninger til at imødegå de bekymringer vedrørende overholdelsen af retsstatsprincippet, som Kommissionen har taget op.
The opinion also underlined that the problem of the appointment of judges has not been solved as recommended and that the implementation of the provision in the Law of 22 July 2016 requiring the Tribunal's President to assign cases to the December judges would be contrary to the Tribunal's judgments, which are universally binding and thus bind all state authorities, including the Tribunal and its President.
Den 31. oktober 2016 vedtog FN's Menneskerettighedskomité afsluttende bemærkninger om den syvende periodiske rapport om Polen.
The opinion concluded that by adopting the law, the Polish Parliament assumed powers of constitutional revision which it did not have when it acted as the ordinary legislature.
Den udtrykte bekymringer over lovgivningsreformernes negative virkning, herunder ændringerne af loven om forfatningsdomstolen fra november og december 2015 og juli 2016, og tilsidesættelsen af forfatningsdomstolens afgørelser, funktion og uafhængighed og gennemførelsen af konventionen.
It considered that the Polish Parliament and the Government continued to challenge the Tribunal's position as the final arbiter of constitutional issues and attributed this authority to themselves: they created new obstacles to the effective functioning of the Tribunal, and acted to further undermine its independence.
Komitéen udtrykte også bekymring over, at premierministeren havde nægtet at kundgøre forfatningsdomstolens afgørelser fra marts og august 2016, og over regeringens bestræbelser på at ændre forfatningsdomstolens sammensætning på en måde, som forfatningsdomstolen havde anset for forfatningsstridig, og over de sager, der var indledt mod forfatningsdomstolens formand for påstået magtmisbrug.
By prolonging the constitutional crisis, they obstructed the Constitutional Tribunal, which cannot play its constitutional role as the guardian of democracy, the rule of law and human rights, according to the opinion.
Komitéen konkluderede, at Polen burde sikre respekt for og beskyttelse af forfatningsdomstolens og dens dommeres integritet og uafhængighed og sikre gennemførelsen af alle dens afgørelser.
The Polish government decided not to participate in the sitting of the Venice Commission on 14 October 2016 as it considered that the opinion of the Venice Commission was one-sided and did not take into account the Government's position.
Komitéen opfordrede indtrængende Polen til straks at kundgøre alle forfatningsdomstolens afgørelser, afstå fra at indføre foranstaltninger, der hindrer dens effektive funktion, og sikre en gennemsigtig og upartisk proces for udnævnelse af dens medlemmer og garanti for uopsigelighed, der opfylder alle krav om legalitet i henhold til indenlandsk ret og folkeretten.
On 26 October 2016, a group of members of the Sejm submitted a new legislative proposal regarding the organisation and proceedings before the Constitutional Tribunal.
Den 7. november 2016 afsagde forfatningsdomstolen en afgørelse om, at bestemmelserne i loven af 22. juli 2016 vedrørende udvælgelsen af formanden og næstformanden for forfatningsdomstolen var i overensstemmelse med forfatningen [10].
The proposal contains detailed provisions on the organisation and proceedings before the Constitutional Tribunal, including new rules on the election of the President and Vice-President of the Tribunal.
Det bemærkes, at eftersom tre dommere ved forfatningsdomstolen havde nægtet at deltage i sagen [11], og de tre dommere, som på lovlig vis var blevet udpeget i oktober 2015 af Sejm i 7. valgperiode, ikke havde påbegyndt deres retlige hverv ved forfatningsdomstolen, var forfatningsdomstolen nødsaget til at ændre sin sammensætning fra et fuldt dommerkollegium til deltagelse af fem dommere for at træffe afgørelse i plenum.
The proposal complements the legislative proposal on the status of judges of the Constitutonal Tribunal, submitted to the Sejm on 30 September 2016 (see above); both legislative proposals are closely interlinked and intend to replace the Law of 22 July 2016.
Siden den 11. august 2016 har forfatningsdomstolen ikke været i stand til at træffe afgørelse i plenum.
On 27 October 2016, within the time limit of 3 months set in the Recommendation, the Polish Government replied to the Commission Recommendation.
Den 10. november 2016 måtte behandlingen af sagen i plenum udsættes, da der ikke kunne opnås et beslutningsdygtigt flertal.
The reply disagrees on all points with the position expressed in the Recommendation and does not announce any new measures to alleviate the rule of law concerns addressed by the Commission.
Endvidere var præsidiet den 30. november og den 8. december 2016 ikke i stand til at vedtage en beslutning om at indstille ansøgere til stillingen som formand for forfatningsdomstolen, da det lovbestemte beslutningsdygtige flertal ikke kunne nås.
On 31 October 2016, the UN Human Rights Committee adopted Concluding observations on the seventh periodic report of Poland.
Den 1. december 2016 vedtog senatet loven af 30. november 2016 om den retlige status for dommere ved forfatningsdomstolen (»lov om dommeres status«).
It expressed concerns about the negative impact of legislative reforms, including the amendments to the Law on the Constitutional Tribunal of November and December 2015 and July 2016, and the disregard of the judgments of the Constitutional Tribunal; the functioning and independence of the Tribunal and the implementation of the Covenant.
Den 2. december 2016 vedtog senatet loven af 30. november 2016 om forfatningsdomstolens organisation og de sager, den behandler (»lov om forfatningsdomstolens organisation og sagsbehandling«).
The Committee also expressed its concerns about the refusal of the Prime Minister to publish the judgments of March and August 2016 of the Tribunal and efforts of the government to change the Tribunal's composition in ways which the Tribunal has regarded as unconstitutional, and about the legal proceedings initiated against the President of the Tribunal for alleged abuse of power.
Den 14. december 2016 afholdt Europa-Parlamentet en forhandling om retsstatssituationen i Polen.
The Committee concluded that Poland should ensure respect for and protection of the integrity and independence of the Constitutional Tribunal and its judges and ensure the implementation of all its judgments.
Under denne debat opfordrede Kommissionen indtrængende de polske myndigheder til ikke at sætte de nye love i kraft, før forfatningsdomstolen havde haft lejlighed til at foretage en forfatningsmæssig prøvelse af dem.
The Committee urged Poland to immediately publish officially all the judgments of the Tribunal, to refrain from introducing measures that obstruct its effective functioning and to ensure a transparent and impartial process for the appointment of its members and security of tenure, which meets all requirements of legality under domestic and international law.
Den 15. december 2016 vedtog senatet loven af 13. december 2016 om gennemførelse af loven om forfatningsdomstolens organisation og sagsbehandling og loven om dommeres status (»gennemførelseslov«).
On 7 November 2016, the Constitutional Tribunal rendered a judgment on the constitutionality of the provisions of the Law of 22 July 2016 regarding the selection of the President and Vice-President of the Tribunal [10].
Den 20. december 2016 tillod Julia Przyłębska, at de tre dommere, der blev udpeget af Sejm i 8. valgperiode uden et gyldigt retsgrundlag, påbegyndte deres hverv ved forfatningsdomstolen og indkaldte til et møde i præsidiet samme dag.
It should be noted that due to the refusal of three judges of the Tribunal to participate in the case [11] and in view of the fact that the three judges that were lawfully nominated in October 2015 by the 7th term of the Sejm had not taken up their judicial functions in the Tribunal, the Constitutional Tribunal had to change its composition from the full bench into a bench of five judges.
På grund af det korte varsel var én dommer ikke i stand til at deltage og anmodede om, at mødet blev udsat til næste dag.
Since 11 August 2016 the Constitutional Tribunal has not been able to sit in full bench to render judgments.
Kun seks dommere, herunder de tre ulovligt udpegede dommere, deltog i mødet og udvalgte to ansøgere, Julia Przyłębska og Mariusz Muszyński, der blev indstillet som ansøgere til præsidenten.
In addition, on 30 November and on 8 December 2016, the General Assembly was unable to adopt a resolution on presenting candidates to the post of the President of the Constitutional Tribunal as the quorum prescribed by law could not be reached.
Den 21. december 2016 udnævnte præsidenten dommer Julia Przyłębska til stillingen som formand for forfatningsdomstolen,
On 1 December 2016, the Senate adopted the Law of 30 November 2016 on the legal status of judges of the Constitutional Tribunal (‘Law on the status of judges’).
VEDTAGET DENNE HENSTILLING:
On 2 December 2016, the Senate adopted the Law of 30 November 2016 on organisation and proceedings before the Constitutional Tribunal (‘Law on organisation and proceedings’).
Republikken Polen bør tage behørigt hensyn til Kommissionens analyse som anført nedenfor og gennemføre de foranstaltninger, der er omhandlet i afsnit 7 i denne henstilling, med henblik på at løse de konstaterede problemer inden for den fastsatte frist.
On 14 December 2016, the European Parliament held a debate on the situation of the rule of law in Poland.
HENSTILLINGENS ANVENDELSESOMRÅDE
During this debate, the Commission urgently called on the Polish authorities not to put into force the new laws before the Constitutional Tribunal has had the occasion to examine their constitutionality.
Betænkelighederne vedrører følgende:
On 15 December 2016, the Senate adopted the Law of 13 December 2016 implementing the Law on organisation and proceedings and the Law on the status of judges (‘Implementing Law’).
udnævnelsen af dommere til forfatningsdomstolen og den manglende gennemførelse af forfatningsdomstolens afgørelser af 3. og 9. december 2015 og 11. august 2016 vedrørende disse spørgsmål
On 19 December 2016, the President of the Republic signed the three laws referred to above which were published in the Official Journal.
den manglende kundgørelse og gennemførelse af en række afgørelser, som forfatningsdomstolen har truffet siden marts 2016, herunder afgørelserne af 9. marts og 11. august vedrørende lovgivningsmæssige retsakter om forfatningsdomstolen
On the same day, the President of the Republic appointed judge Julia Przylębska, a judge elected by the new Sejm, to the position of acting President of the Constitutional Tribunal.
UDNÆVNELSE AF DOMMERE TIL FORFATNINGSDOMSTOLEN
Judge Julia Przyłębska refused and seven other judges also did not participate in the meeting.
Kommissionen anbefalede i sin henstilling af 27. juli 2016 [12], at de polske myndigheder til fulde gennemfører forfatningsdomstolens afgørelser af 3. og 9. december 2015, ifølge hvilke de tre dommere, som på lovlig vis blev udpeget i oktober 2015 af Sejm i 7. valgperiode, kan påbegynde deres retlige hverv ved forfatningsdomstolen, og at de tre dommere, der blev udpeget af Sejm i 8. valgperiode uden gyldigt retsgrundlag, ikke påbegynder deres hverv.
Only six judges, including the three judges unlawfully nominated, took part in the meeting and elected two candidates, Julia Przyłębska and Mariusz Muszyński, who were presented as candidate to the President of the Republic.
Hvad angår loven af 22. juli 2016 om forfatningsdomstolen bemærkede Kommissionen, at denne lov var i strid med forfatningsdomstolens afgørelser af 3. og 9. december.
On 21 December 2016, the President of the Republic appointed judge Julia Przyłębska to the post of President of the Constitutional Tribunal.
Ifølge artikel 90 [13] skal formanden for forfatningsdomstolen tildele sager til alle dommere, som har aflagt ed over for præsidenten, men som endnu ikke har påbegyndt deres hverv som dommere.
HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:
Forfatningsdomstolen erklærede ved sin afgørelse af 11. august 2016 artikel 90 i loven af 22. juli 2016 forfatningsstridig, og Venedigkommissionen bekræftede i sin udtalelse af 14. oktober 2016, at denne bestemmelse ikke er i overensstemmelse med retsstatsprincippet [14].
The Republic of Poland should duly take into account the Commission's analysis set out hereafter and take the measures figuring in section 7 of this Recommendation so that the problems identified are solved within the time limit set.
Den polske regering nægter dog fortsat at anerkende gyldigheden af afgørelsen af 11. august 2016 og at kundgøre den i statstidende (se afsnit 3 nedenfor).
SCOPE OF THE RECOMMENDATION
Den polske regering gav i sit svar af 27. oktober 2016 udtryk for den holdning, at det i forfatningsdomstolens afgørelser af 3. og 9. december 2015 ikke var præciseret, hvilke dommere der skulle påbegynde deres hverv, og at Sejms nye lovgivende forsamling på lovlig vis havde udpeget fem dommere i december 2015.
The present Recommendation complements the Recommendation of 27 July 2016.
Det indrømmes i svaret, at forfatningsdomstolen i konklusionen til afgørelsen af 3. december 2015 kom ind på præsidentens pligt til straks at tage en dommer, som Sejm har udpeget til forfatningsdomstolen, i ed.
It examines which of the concerns raised in that recommendation have been addressed, sets out the remaining concerns and lists a number of new concerns of the Commission with regard to the rule of law in Poland which have arisen since then.
I svaret gives dog udtryk for den holdning, at denne afgørelse ikke kan forpligte andre myndigheder til at anvende bestemmelser på den måde, der er anført i en given sag.
On this basis, it makes recommendations to the Polish authorities on how to address these concerns.
Denne fortolkning strider mod princippet om loyalt samarbejde mellem statslige organer, der — som understreget i Venedigkommissionens udtalelser — er en forfatningsretlig forudsætning i en demokratisk stat funderet på retsstatsprincippet.
the appointment of judges of the Constitutional Tribunal and the lack of implementation of the judgments of the Constitutional Tribunal of 3 and 9 December 2015 and of 11 August 2016 relating to these matters;