The Constitutional Law and Politics Working Group is delighted to invite you to Professor Morijn’s presentation on how Europe's national judges cooperate formally and informally to resist Polish de-democratisation.
John Morijn is professor of law and politics in international relations at the University of Groningen, and Henrik Enderlein Fellow/Visiting Professor of Practice and Visiting Professor of International Law at Hertie School of Governance in Berlin (2024-2025). He is also the chair of the EU Fundamental Rights Agency's Scientific Committee. He studied law in Rotterdam and EU law at the College of Europe in Bruges, and holds a PhD in international law from the EUI (2009). He previously held visiting fellowships at Princeton University and New York University and was a civil servant and diplomat for The Netherlands. Over the last five years John Morijn followed intensively and upclose how Polish judges acted, and were supported by colleagues from all over Europe, as judicial independence came under intense pressure.
Abstract
One of the most remarkable, and yet remarkably under-theorised aspects of the rule of law backsliding crisis in Europe has been how one group of professional actors, European judges, has stood firm in holding the line, together. European judges have cooperated and helped each other across borders and jurisdictions to defend judicial independence. In doing so they have used legal means, but also organised solidarity actions, sought cooperation with civil society organisations and scholars, devised media strategies and developed and executed information campaigns for the wider public. Acting on their oath of office, they have done all of this on a very limited budget, on little prior training and despite their most delicate position in the trias politica. Based in part on several years of close contact with European judges in the context of rule of law backsliding in Poland, this presentation aims to offer an interpretation of the circumstances that led them to decide to act up, how they did so, and what lessons can be drawn from that. For that purpose, it analyses the different formal and informal routes that European judges, and civil society organisations and academics who support them, have available to them to act. In this regard different directions of formal judicial interactions are distinguished: bottom-bottom (national-national), bottom-top (national v. inter/supranational), top-down (inter/supranational v. national) and top-top (supranational v. international). The presentation analyses the crucial interplay of these avenues, the strategies that seem to underlie using which one(s) when, and the outcomes the various actions have produced. Based on that it reflects on wider legal and political implications of the remarkable ways in which European judges have stood up for judicial independence.