CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 10 juillet 2023

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s8EB5F569 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super } .s25F5CC02 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } Published on 28 August 2023   FIRST SECTION Application no. 18490/22 Stanisław JAŹWIŃSKI against Poland and 4 other applications (see list appended) communicated on 10 July 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicants are judges or lawyers who applied for vacancies at different courts, or requested to continue serving as a judge beyond their retirement age. On various dates indicated in the table the National Council of the Judiciary (the “NCJ”) decided not to recommend the applicants for the judicial posts or otherwise dismissed their requests. The applicants appealed to the Supreme Court against the NCJ resolutions. On various dates the Chamber of Extraordinary Review and Public Affairs of the Supreme Court dismissed their appeals. On each occasion the Chamber was composed of judges appointed to that court by the President of Poland on 10   October 2018, on recommendation of the NCJ (resolution no. 331/2018 of 28 August 2018) as established under the Amending Act on the NCJ and certain other statutes of 8   December 2017 ( ustawa o zmianie ustawy o Krajowej Radzie Sądownictwa oraz niektórych innych ustaw ; “the 2017 Act”). The applicants complain that their cases were examined by the Chamber of Extraordinary Review and Public Affairs of the Supreme Court which was not an “independent and impartial tribunal established by law” within the meaning of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Was the Chamber of Extraordinary Review and Public Affairs of the Supreme Court which dealt with the applicants’ cases an “independent and impartial tribunal established by law” as required by Article   6 §   1 of the Convention?   Reference is made to the Court’s judgments in Dolińska-Ficek and Ozimek v.   Poland , nos. 49868/19 and 57511/19, 8 November 2021, §§   283-359 and Guðmundur Andri Ástráðsson v. Iceland [GC], no. 26374/18, 1   December 2020, §§   205-290.   APPENDIX No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by Notes 1.     18490/22 Jaźwiński v. Poland 05/04/2022 Stanisław JAŹWIŃSKI 1955 Radom Polish Monika GĄSIOROWSKA The applicant is a regional court’s judge who in 2019 requested to continue serving as a judge beyond his retirement age. The NCJ dismissed his requests on two occasions, but the resolutions were quashed by the Supreme Court upon the applicant’s appeals.   On 16/04/2021 the NCJ dismissed another request by the applicant to continue serving as a judge beyond his retirement age (resolution no. 442/2021).   On 01/12/2021 the Chamber of Extraordinary Review and Public Affairs of the Supreme Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal (served on 04/02/2022, case no. I NKRS 80/21). It sat as a panel of three judges, composed of J. Lemańska, P. Czubik, M. Szczepaniec.   2.     25294/22 Żurek v. Poland (N o 3) 09/05/2022 Waldemar ŻUREK 1970 Rzeplin Polish Sylwia GREGORCZYK-ABRAM The applicant is a well-known judge who applied for a post at the Supreme Court. On 12/05/21 the NCJ decided not to recommend the applicant (resolution no. 531/2021). The applicant appealed.   On 14/12/2021 the Chamber of Extraordinary Review and Public Affairs dismissed the applicant’s appeal (served on 20/12/2021, case no. I NKRS 68/21). It sat as a panel of three judges composed of K. Wiak, O. Nawrot, M Szczepaniec.     3.     30091/22 Fras v. Poland 10/06/2022 Mariusz FRAS 1970 Sosnowiec Polish Piotr KŁADOCZNY The applicant is a lawyer who applied for a post at the Supreme Court. On 24/06/21 the NCJ decided not to recommend the applicant (resolution no. 764/2021). The applicant appealed against the resolution.   On 16/02/22 the Chamber of Extraordinary Review and Public Affairs dismissed the applicant’s appeal (served on 03/03/22, case no. I NKRS 129/21). It sat as a panel of three judges composed of O. Nawrot, J. Niczyporuk, P. Księżak.     4.     31638/22 Błachowicz v. Poland 15/06/2022 Bożena BŁACHOWICZ 1966 Przemyśl Polish Sylwia GREGORCZYK-ABRAM The applicant is a judge at the Przemyśl Regional Court. In 2020 the applicant applied for a vacant post at the Rzeszów Court of Appeal. On 11/12/2020 the NCJ decided not to recommend the applicant (resolution no. 954/2020). The applicant appealed.   On 01/12/2021 the Chamber of Extraordinary Review and Public Affairs dismissed the appeal (served on 17/12/2021, case no. I NKRS 81/21). It sat as a panel of three judges composed of J. Lemańska, M. Dobrowolski and M. Szczepaniec.     5.     36908/22 Czeszkiewicz v. Poland 07/07/2022 Dominik CZESZKIEWICZ 1978 Suwałki Polish Sylwia GREGORCZYK-ABRAM The applicant is a judge at the Suwałki District Court. In 2021 he applied for a post at the Supreme Court. On 25/06/2021 the NCJ decided not to recommend the applicant (resolution no. 786/2021). The applicant appealed.   On 22/12/2021 the Chamber of Extraordinary Review and Public Affairs dismissed the appeal (served on 09/03/2022, case no. I NKRS 119/21). It sat as a panel of three judges composed of T. Demendecki, J. Niczyporuk, K. Wiak.