The European Commission has ruled that the selection of judicial members of the National Council of the Judiciary (NCJ) by the Sejm does not violate EU law, thereby dismantling the narrative surrounding the so-called “neoNCJ” and “neosjudges.” The Supreme Court has withdrawn its preliminary question to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), and the Advocate General of the CJEU has confirmed that the involvement of the NCJ in judicial nominations does not undermine judicial independence. The Lawyers for Poland Association is calling for an end to political attacks on the judiciary.
In a post on the platform X, Lawyers for Poland declared that the narrative surrounding the so-called “neoNCJ” and “neosjudges” has been debunked, pointing to key facts that challenge this “political-corporate narrative.”
According to the information provided in the post, in proceedings before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), initiated by the Supreme Court in 2024, the European Commission clearly stated:
“EU law does not preclude judicial members of the National Council of the Judiciary from being selected by the national parliament-provided that the system offers sufficient guarantees of independence.”
Lawyers for Poland also refer to the opinion of CJEU Advocate General Dean Spielmann from April 29, 2025 (case C-521/21), who stated:
The mere fact that a body such as the NCJ takes part in the nomination procedure is not enough to undermine a judge’s independence.
This confirms that challenging judges solely because they were appointed with the involvement of the NCJ after 2018 has no legal basis.
The Association emphasizes that the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, pursuant to Article 187(1)(2), does not impose a “corporate” model for selecting NCJ members, and that the 2017 law regulating the appointment of judges by the Sejm was found to be constitutional by the Constitutional Tribunal in a ruling issued on March 25, 2019 (ref. K 12/18).
In a decision issued on July 9, 2025, the Supreme Court dismissed a motion to exclude a judge appointed with the participation of the new NCJ, stating that:
“the mere date of appointment and the involvement of the new NCJ cannot be grounds for questioning a judge’s impartiality.”
Lawyers for Poland criticize the narrative about “neosjudges” promoted by circles associated with the so-called “judicial caste” and politicians from Civic Platform.
As they write: “The attack on the NCJ was an attempt to protect corporate influence and resist democratic oversight of the judiciary.” They add that questioning the legality of judges by politicians, including the former Minister of Justice Adam Bodnar, “not only undermines citizens’ trust in the rule of law, but also risks judicial anarchy and legal chaos.”
The Association calls for an end to the “false narrative about the ‘neoNCJ’ and ‘neosjudges’” and urges the restoration of trust in the courts based on facts, rather than “vested interests, media hysteria, and political calculation.”