Europe fortifies the independence of judges

 The European Union’s highest legal body put Poland on notice to uphold rule of law. The ruling also counters Russia’s claim that liberal values are history.

AP
Poland's Supreme Court building in Warsaw.

In a comment Thursday about the drift toward authoritarian populism in Europe, Russian President Vladimir Putin said liberal democracy has become “obsolete.” He implied that values such as individual rights had “outlived their purpose.”

Not so, responded European Union leaders. What began seven decades ago as a community of trading nations has since become a community of 28 countries integrated by transnational law. To make the point, they cited a June 24 decision by the European Court of Justice.

The EU’s highest legal body ruled that Poland’s populist government had acted illegally by forcing a third of the country’s Supreme Court judges into early retirement, thus violating the principle of the irremovability of judges. The move by Poland’s ruling Law and Justice party was widely seen as a power grab to end judicial independence and stack the benches with loyalists. It is part of a broader crackdown since 2016 on media and anything else that might challenge the party.

The EU’s first disciplinary action against a member state sends a strong message to others in the bloc inclined to step on democratic values. In addition, it is a reminder that national courts are required to implement EU law. The ruling also sends a signal to seven countries on the edges of Europe that are candidates to join.

Poland could now face punitive measures, such as a cutoff of EU funding or an end to its voting rights in European bodies. Even before the ruling, Polish leaders had put on hold their scheme to retire the judges.

Rule of law requires the independence of judges. It is the basis for ensuring individual freedoms and equality before the law. Polls show two-thirds of Europeans have positive feelings toward the EU. In Poland, such support is very high.

While the bloc’s popularity may be based on its economic opportunities and the freedom to travel, it is rule of law that holds it all together. Contrary to Mr. Putin’s view, liberal values are not becoming obsolete.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.