Mediaboss Marketing

The European Commission on Saturday launched an "infringement procedure" against Poland over parts ofcontroversial judiciary reforms.

The EU executive decided on Wednesday to start legal action against Poland for violating the bloc's law, but had to wait until Poland officially published the new law to send a letter to Warsaw.

The Commission is concerned that the reforms will undermine the independence of the judiciary by giving the justice minister discretionary power to extend the mandate of common judges, as well as dismiss and appoint lower court presidents.

"The new rules allow the Minister of Justice to exert influence onindividualordinary judges through, in particular, the vague criteria for the prolongation of their mandates, thereby undermining the principle of irremovability of judges," the Commission said in a statement.

It also took issue with the introduction of different retirement ages for female and male judges, set at 60 and 65 years, respectively.That aspect of the reform violates EU anti-discrimination policy.

EU piles on pressure

Poland's governing Law and Justice Party (PiS) now has one month to respond. If the Polish response is unsatisfactory, the Commission can issue requests that Warsaw must implement its recommendationswithin two months.

If Poland fails to implement the recommendations, it could end up at the European Court of Justice. Decisions from Europe's top court are binding and can result infines on members.

Polish President Andrzej Duda signed the reform on Tuesday. But after the EU warnings and mass protests, the president surprisingly vetoed two other controversial lawspassed by lawmakers.

Those reforms would have increased political control over the Supreme Court, removed its judges and allowed lawmakers to choose members of a body that decides on court appointments.

PiS has vowed to push through the reforms despite the veto.

The Commission has warned Poland that itcould trigger Article 7 if the Supreme Court reforms are implemented.

Article 7 is an action, never before used,that would see Poland lose its voting rights in the European Council, or meeting of European ministers, for violating fundamental EU laws.

The EU and Poland have been in disagreement since the conservative PiS came to power in 2015 seeking aseries of legal and media reforms that critics say undermine democracy and the rule of law.

Last year, the EU took the unprecedented step of launchinga process of reviewing the rule of law in Poland.

cw/tj(AFP, dpa, Reuters)

See the original post here:
European Union launches legal challenge against Poland - Deutsche Welle

Slovakian prime minister Robert Fico delivered a damning verdict of Brussels decision making processes, saying they need a radical overhaul if the bloc is to survive.

In a forthright address he said recent meetings of the EU Council of 27 leaders showed how little we know about each other and bemoaned the superficial nature of European debate.

GETTY

He said that fewer decisions should be taken in Brussels and more power should be delegated to regional bodies in comments which will fuel fears amongst some that the bloc could disintegrate.

Mr Fico made the remarks after the EU Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker proposed a meeting between the Visegrad bloc of nations and Italy to try and break the stand-off on migration.

Slovakia, alongside Hungary, the Czech Republic and Poland, have all refused to take part in Brussels refugee quota scheme saying that it presents threats to their sovereignty and security.

Yesterday the advocate general of the ECJ released an opinion stating that an appeal against having to accept migrants, launched by Hungary and Slovakia, should be thrown out.

That suggestion drew a furious response from officials in Bratislava which said it would never accept refugee quotas, although Mr Fico was more circumspect in his remarks today saying only that he had a serious problem with the programme.

However, the Slovakian leader was much more forthright on where he thinks the EU is going wrong, saying it needs to make decisions less centrally and more regionally if it wants to make progress in the future.

It has been confirmed how important it is to meet in smaller formats

Robert Fico

He said: If we have a general discussion, we know that it will also be a particular discussion. Im mentioning this because the format of 27 or 28 is not a sufficient space for in depth discussion.

We could see it at the meeting of V4 [Visegrad] and the French president or the Austrian chancellor, prime minister and myself, where it was shown how little we know about each other, how little information is there.

Thats why I believe that this meetingwill be a meeting which will clarify lots of things, that will move things forward. The smaller formats have been lacking and we need to have more meetings in these small formats.

He added: It has been confirmed how important it is to meet in smaller formats and not to address such delicate topics as 27 or 28 prime ministers.

Getty

1 of 29

Countries that are in the European Union

Mr Ficos remarks offer a damning insight into how EU decision making, which is currently focussed around agreements between 28 leaders or ministers, operate in practice.

He suggests that there is little discussion of substantive issues at EU Council meetings, with leaders nodding through measures with little understanding of how their colleagues feel.

His remarks will strike a strong chord with Brexiteers, who argued that a democratic deficit at the heart of the European project, with little outside scrutiny, was a key reason for giving back control over lawmaking to the UK parliament.

However suggestions that regional groupings, such as the Visegrad Four and the Benelux countries, should wield more power will alarm eurocrats who feel keeping power centralised in Brussels is the best way of stopping the project falling apart.

Read the rest here:
European leader in SHOCK admission: The EU doesn't work and we all barely know each other - Express.co.uk

A rare role reversal played out in Washington on Thursday night, as the Senate took a break from debating the repeal of the Affordable Care Act to pass a bipartisan bill that will serve to alienate U.S. allies and isolate America.

That job, of course, is typically reserved for President Trump, but Congress showed decisively that the administration doesnt have a monopoly on the practice, voting 98-2 to apply new sanctions to Russia, Iran, and for good measure, North Korea, too.

The Iran sanctions threaten to blow up the Iran nuclear deal, a landmark foreign policy achievement of President Obamas, one negotiated with both European allies and with Russia and China. The Russian sanctions have been met with threats of retaliation not just from Russia but from the European Union, which is apoplectic that the U.S. is threatening to undo its regional energy policy. And the North Korean sanctions, well, nobody really knows what those will do.

The bill passed in the House 419-3 with little objection. When the Senate took up a similar sanctions bill last month against Russia and Iran, the measure passed overwhelmingly, with Sens. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rand Paul, R.-Ky., the only dissenting voices. They were again the only dissenters Thursday.

Sanctions bills against U.S. adversaries usually sail through Congress uncontested, and on a bipartisan basis. Few members of Congress want to vote against sanctions, fearful that the move could be spun into an attack ad that accusing them of being pro-Russia or pro-Iran.

Thebill has the enthusiastic backing of Democrats, who are looking to punish Russia for its election interference. Sinceseveral of the meetings between Trump administration and Russian officials reportedlydiscussed sanctions relief, coverage of the Trump-Russiascandal has dwarfed any discussion of how U.S. allies are likely to respond to new sanctions.

The sanctions may be a symbolic move for Congress, but they are very real to Europeans who do business with neighboring Russia. On Sunday, the European Union indicated that they would retaliate against additional sanctions on Russia, fearful that they would impact energy companies. A memo obtained from Brussels by the Financial Times said that the EU should stand ready to act within days if the bill was adopted without EU concerns taken into account.

Even the French government which has allegedly faced its own election inference by Russia spoke out against the sanctions. The French Foreign Ministry on Wednesday said the sanctions appeared to violate international law, and that the European Union would have to respond due to the impact on firms.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., told The Intercept that the concerns of U.S. allies come second to the need to punish Russia for its election interference. I just looked at the sanctions, and its very hard, in view of what we know just happened in this last election, not to move ahead with [sanctions], she said.

When asked about international repercussions, Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., a Senate newcomer who many are speculating for a presidential run, said she would be concerned about the response of allies. Thats part of the issue, isnt it? We have to think about it in the context of our partners and friends. I do have concerns, yes, she said after voting for the sanctions bill.

Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., said he was satisfied that the EU concerns had been addressed. I looked at those concerns last night, he said. I know there were a number of changes made to the legislation to address the legitimate concerns. In other words, my view is that we effectively addressed the major concerns that were expressed.

Yet Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., one of the leading champions of sanctions with Russia, said that it was the job of the EU to come around to the legislation, not for the legislation to be brought around to them. I hope theyll come around, he told The Intercept of the EU. Not that I know of, McCain said of any changes to the bill to accommodate them. Certainly not in the portion of the bill I was responsible for.

Another author of the bill, Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., an ardent foe of the Iran deal, said that very little was done to take the EU concerns into account. Not much, to be honest with you, he told The Intercept. There was some sense of the Congress that we should consult with our allies, and there was something actually done for more about U.S. companies than about Europeans about any joint ventures that might include a Russian partner on oil. But other than that, nothing much.

Illinois Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin, said that international allies concerns could be resolved diplomatically in the future. This would be the type of thing that in the ordinary course of diplomacy our secretary of state and secretary of commerce would be sitting down with leaders in the EU to resolve any misunderstandings. I dont believe the relationship of this administration with the EU has been that positive, and obviously theres some skepticism about what our motives are.

In addition, the new Iranian sanctions threaten to jeopardize the 2015 Iran deal negotiated by President Obama. Despite the fact the Trump administration has levied its own sanctions against Iran, the administration has certified that Iran is complying with the deal.

While the Iran sanctions bill was at an early stage, former Secretary of State John Kerry spoke out against it, saying it would jeopardize the Iran nuclear deal.

And Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has threatened to retaliate tit for tat. According to Reuters, Iranian state media quoted the president saying, If the enemy puts part of their promises underfoot then we will also put part of it underfoot. And if they put all of their promises underfoot then we will put promises underfoot.

President Trump has not taken a clear position on the bill. White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci told CNN on Thursday that the president may sign the bill into law as is, or may even consider vetoing the measure.

Menendez said he wasnt overly concerned with the European reaction, and that it was up to the administration to smooth it over. Ive lived through this through every sanction Ive ever authored and it will take the administrations leadership to make sure we bring our allies together, he said.

Top photo: Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., leaves a meeting of GOP senators in the U.S. Capitol on June 22, 2017, in Washington, D.C.

Excerpt from:
With the European Union Livid, Congress Pushes Forward on Sanctions Against Russia, Iran and North Korea - The Intercept

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - The European Commission launched legal action on Saturday against what it sees as Polish government attempts to undermine the independence of judges.

It gave Warsaw a month to respond.

EU commissioners decided to launch the "infringement procedure" for violating European Union law at a meeting on Wednesday, the first step in a legal process that may end at the bloc's top court, pending publication of Poland's new law.

The Commission is concerned about discretionary power given to Poland's minister of justice to prolong the mandates of judges who reach retirement age, as well as to dismiss and appoint court presidents.

"The new rules allow the minister of justice to exert influence on individual ordinary judges through, in particular, the vague criteria for the prolongation of their mandates thereby undermining the principle of irremovability of judges," the European Commission said in a statement on Saturday.

It said a key legal concern was the introduction of different retirement ages for female judges (60) and male judges (65).

Polish President Andrzej Duda on Tuesday signed into law the bill on ordinary courts, but, in a move welcomed by Brussels, blocked two other bills that would have empowered the government and parliament to replace Supreme Court judges.

Poland's eurosceptic, nationalist government has rejected Brussels' objections as "blackmail" and unjustified criticism, but has said Warsaw was open to talks to resolve the dispute.

Commission First Vice President Frans Timmermans sent a letter on Friday to Poland's foreign minister reiterating an invitation to him and the justice minister to meet in Brussels to relaunch dialogue.

He said on Wednesday that the Commission could trigger Article 7, a legal process of suspending Poland's EU voting rights, if Warsaw went ahead with plans to undermine the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law.

The European Commission also this week gave Poland a month to respond to concerns for the rule of law raised by the EU executive in an unprecedented process launched last year.

Reporting by Philip Blenkinsop; editing by Jeremy Gaunt

See the original post:
EU starts action against Poland over judiciary reforms - Reuters

GETTYREUTERS

It is the latest clash between the EU and Poland after the bloc waded into Warsaw's plans for judicial reforms.

The ruling comes as part of attempts to save the trees at the UNESCO World Heritage-listed forest, as a European Union lodged case against Warsaw looks likely to drag on for years.

A spokeswoman for the European Court of Justice (ECJ) gave no immediate reason for the interim ruling, but it follows a legal appeal from the European Commission earlier this month.

In an interim decision, the ECJ said the logging should stop immediately as it could cause "serious and irreversible damage" to the forest. The main case filed by the Commission against Warsaw at the ECJ could take years to conclude.

The European Commission says the ongoing logging at the forest, which is near the city of Hajnwka, violates the blocs wildlife protection laws.

Straddling the border between Poland and Belarus, Bialowieza is one of Europe's oldest and last remaining ancient forests.

Covering around 350,606 acres, it is made up of mixed forest, wetlands and river valleys.

The forest is home to Europes largest herd of bison, and more than 250 bird species - some incredibly rare.

GETTY

Environmental campaigners have held regular protests at the site as part of efforts to halt the logging, with UNESCO appealing to Poland to stop chopping down trees.

Despite the outrage, Poland's right-wing, eurosceptic government says the process is necessary to protect the forest from beetles, thus safeguarding local communities living in the area.

Warsaw officials have also increased the quota of wood that can be harvested there.

Environmental activist group ClientEarth welcomed the decision, saying continued logging would cause "serious and irreparable damage to this priceless natural environment".

Agata Szafraniuk, the group's lawyer said: "In the history of the EU, emergency measures like this ban have only been used three times in nature conservation issues.

"So far there is no case in which an interim measure of the court was not respected.

If Polish authorities do not follow that decision, it will be a serious conflict with the EU law."

GETTY

However, Poland's Environment Minister Jan Szyszko - himself a hunter who enjoys the backing of forester and hunting lobbies - claims that more than one million trees will be cut down in Bialowieza this year to curb a bark beetle invasion.

Should Poland lose the main case at the ECJ, it faces a fine in excess of 3.58 million (4 million), as well as the possibility of daily penalties of up to 268,500 (300,000) for each day Warsaw defies the court's decision.

The Polish logging issue has deeply divided the countrys citizens, and has intensified tensions with Brussels.

Relations between Poland and EU officials have become increasingly strained following the PiS governments tight control of state media and the courts, as well as the countrys refusal to take in migrants.

AFP/Getty Images

1 of 14

Protesters shout slogans during a protest in front of the presidential palace in Warsaw

A local group of nationalist activists in Bialowieza has described environmentalists "green terrorists, vowing to confront them.

In response, Greenpeace Poland spokesman Krzysztof Cibor said: "The defenders in the Bialowieza forest are vigilant, but we all hope that nothing bad will happen."

Polish environmentalists claim Mr Szyszko's real motives for continued logging are purely political and economic, with logging increasing revenues within the local community - one of the poorest in Poland.

Poland still has several days to react to the ECJ interim decision.

Should Poland lose the main case at the ECJ, it could be fined a lump sum of more than 4 million euros and possible daily penalties of up to 300,000 euros for every day in which Warsaw fails to adhere to the court's decision.

GETTY

It comes as the ruling Law and Justice party (PiS) clashes with the EU.

On Monday, President Andrzej Duda vetoed two of three flagship judiciary reforms that had triggered large protests in Poland and European Union warnings of legal action over concerns the move would undermine Polish democracy.

The judiciary overhaul, coupled with a drive by PiS to expand its powers in other areas including the media, has provoked a crisis in relations with the executive European Commission in Brussels and sparked one of the biggest political conflicts since Poland overthrew communism in 1989.

Though many Poles view their judiciary as corrupt and dominated by communist-era ways of thinking, others see the PiS-driven reform efforts as a power grab inimical to democracy.

Read the original post:
End of the EU? Brussels takes massive swipe at Poland as crisis continues - Express.co.uk