Načelo sodniške neodvisnosti v Evropski uniji : magistrsko delo

Plohl, Danaja

| | SLO | ENG | Cookies and privacy

Bigger font | Smaller font

First page > Show document

Show document

Title:	Načelo sodniške neodvisnosti v Evropski uniji : magistrsko delo
Authors:	ID Plohl, Danaja (Author) ID Ferčič, Aleš (Mentor) More about this mentor...
Files:	MAG_Plohl_Danaja_2021.pdf (1,16 MB) MD5: CF67067A3414A3EB8128D4421C245AE8 PID: 20.500.12556/dkum/b0948236-6f74-4cc8-871b-e04247464cd2
Language:	Slovenian
Work type:	Master's thesis/paper
Typology:	2.09 - Master's Thesis
Organization:	PF - Faculty of Law
Abstract:	Neodvisnost sodstva predstavlja konstitutivni element načela učinkovitega sodnega varstva, ki izhaja iz skupnih tradicij držav članic in predstavlja splošno načelo prava EU. Učinkoviti sodni sistemi so odločilnega pomena za ohranjanje načela pravne države. Koncept sodniške neodvisnosti je avtonomni pojem prava EU, katerega Sodišče EU deli na tri vidike: zunanji vidik, ki ne dovoljuje nikakršnega zunanjega posredovanja, pritiskov ali vplivov; notranji vidik stoji na ideji absolutne nevtralnosti sodnikov (nepristranskost), ki od sodnika zahteva zgolj objektivnost in enako distanco do strank spora; tretji vidik – načelo neodstavljivosti – je Sodišče EU nedavno izpostavilo v zadevi Poljske, pri čemer je pojasnilo, da se od sodnikov lahko, le pod vnaprej določenimi strogimi pogoji in v cilju legitimnih interesov, zahteva, da predčasno odide iz svojega sodniškega položaja. Po drugi strani pa je ESČP razvilo subjektivno-objektivni test sodniške nepristranskosti, pri katerem lahko vzpostavimo vzporednice z definicijo s strani Sodišča EU. Sodniška neodvisnost je bistvenega pomena tudi pri izpolnjevanju kriterijev za postavitev predhodnega vprašanja po 267. členu PDEU. V Portugues judges primeru je SEU jasno odločilo, da je pogoj neodvisnosti nacionalnih sodišč temeljni pogoj za pravilno delovanje postopka predhodnega odločanja, ki v svoji primarni funkciji zagotavlja polni učinek, enotnost predvsem pa avtonomijo prava EU. Povrhu vsega pa nacionalne določbe držav članic s svojimi procesnimi pravili ne smejo ovirati sodišč pri postavitvi predhodnega vprašanja, saj se v nasprotnem primeru prekomerno posega v samostojnost in neodvisnost sodišč. Trenutno največje polemike se dogajajo na Poljskem in Madžarskem - v dveh državah članicah EU, ki vztrajno kršita načelo pravne države, kar je že bilo ugotovljeno s strani Sodišča EU. V vseh zadevah je Sodišče EU podalo pomembne precedense, ko je pri odločitvah ubralo pristop skozi prizmo načel iz 19. člena PEU v korelaciji s 47. členom Listine EU, ki ščitita načelo sodniške neodvisnosti v okviru načela učinkovitega sodnega varstva. Proti obema država članicama se je povrhu številnih sodnih postopkov sprožil tudi politični postopek. Tako sodni postopek po 258. členu PDEU kot politični postopek iz 7. člena PEU lahko tečeta istočasno. Če se nam v primeru sodnega postopka ponuja direktna pot do Sodišča EU, je potrebno pri političnem postopku doseči visoke pragove, da zadostimo pravnemu standardu »hujša in vztrajna« kršitev vrednot iz 2. člena PEU.
Keywords:	Učinkovito sodno varstvo, načelo sodniške neodvisnosti, sodstvo, postopek predhodnega odločanja, nacionalna procesna avtonomija, postopki zoper državo članico, načelo pravne države, Poljska in Madžarska.
Place of publishing:	Maribor
Place of performance:	Maribor
Publisher:	[D. Plohl]
Year of publishing:	2021
Number of pages:	89 str.
PID:	20.500.12556/DKUM-79218
UDC:	347.962.6(043.3)
COBISS.SI-ID:	66380547
Publication date in DKUM:	09.06.2021
Views:	2322
Downloads:	657
Metadata:
Categories:	PF
:	Copy citation

Average score:	(0 votes)
Your score:	Voting is allowed only for logged in users.
Share:

Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click on the title to get all document metadata.

Licences

License:	CC BY-NC-ND 4.0, Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International

Link:	http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Description:	The most restrictive Creative Commons license. This only allows people to download and share the work for no commercial gain and for no other purposes.
Licensing start date:	26.05.2021

Secondary language

Language:	English
Title:	The principle of judicial independence in European Union
Abstract:	The independence of the judiciary constitutes a fundamental element of the principle of effective judicial protection, which derives from the common traditions of the Member States and is furthermore a general principle of EU law. In order to uphold the rule of law principle, the effective judicial systems are of paramount importance. The concept of judicial independence is an autonomous concept of EU law. The Court of Justice has divided it into three aspects. First, external judicial independence, which requires that the judicial body must not be subordinated to any orders, instructions or other external interventions. Second, internal aspect of judicial independence, which is based on the idea of absolute neutrality of the judges (impartiality) – which seeks to safeguard a level playing field for the parties and achieve objectivity. Third, the principle of irremovability, which was recently highlighted by the Court of Justice in the case of Poland and determined that judges can be required to resign prematurely only on the grounds of pre-determined strict conditions and legitimate interest. On the other hand, the ECtHR has developed a subjective-objective standard to determine judicial impartiality with which we can draw parallels with the definition given by the Court of Justice. The independence of the national courts is moreover essential to the proper functioning of the preliminary ruling mechanism under Article 267 TFEU. That was evidently emphasized in the Portugueses judges case. In its primary function this procedure ensures full effect and autonomy of EU law as well as the consistency and uniformity of the interpretation of EU law. Above all, Member States cannot make amendments to its national legislation which would prevent requests for the preliminary ruling addressed to the Court, otherwise the independence and impartiality of the courts would be infringed. Currently, immense controversies are happening in Poland and Hungary – two Member States that persistently violate the rule of law, which has already been established by the Court of Justice. In these cases, the Court of Justice has set imperative precedents when taking a decision-making approach through the Article 19 TEU in correlation with the Article 47 of the Charter, both respecting the principle of judicial independence within the principle of effective judicial protection. Not only there has been many legal proceedings against both Member States, but the political proceedings have been initiated as well. It must be emphasized that both proceedings can be invoked at the same time. The difference is that, in the case of legal procedure, it is possible to directly initiate a procedure at the Court of Justice, however, when it comes to the political procedure, we must meet the criteria of »serious and persistent breach« of the values referred to in Article 2 TEU, which is not an easy task.
Keywords:	Effective judicial protection, rule of law principle, principle of judicial independence, judiciary, preliminary ruling procedure, national procedural autonomy, infringement actions against member states, the case of Poland and Hungary.

Comments

Leave comment

You must log in to leave a comment.

Comments (0)

0 - 0 / 0

There are no comments!

Back