Decisions: Темелни права - Правда - Право на ефективна правна помош и фер судење

In a request for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU, the Specialised Criminal Court in Bulgaria asked the ECJ whether a national law, which does not provide for any procedural remedy for errors and omissions in the content of the indictment which prejudice the right of the accused person to know what he or she is accused of, after the end of the first hearing in a criminal case (pre-trial hearing), is compatible with Article 6(3) of Directive 2012/13 on the right to information in criminal proceedings and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and if the answer to that question is in the negative: would an interpretation of the national provisions governing amendment of the charges that allows the prosecution service to rectify those substantive ambiguities and shortcomings in the indictment at the hearing, so as to take proper and effective account of the accused person’s right to be informed of the accusation, be in keeping with the aforesaid provisions and with Article 47 of the Charter, or would it be in keeping with those provisions to refrain from applying national legislation prohibiting the staying of court proceedings and referral of the case back to the public prosecution service with directions to draft a new indictment. ECJ responded that the two aforementioned provisions must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which does not provide for a procedural means of remedying, errors and deficiencies in the indictment which prejudice the right of the accused person to be provided with detailed information about the charges following the pre-trial hearing in a criminal case. Furthermore, they must be interpreted as requiring the referring court to give an interpretation of the national rules on the amendment of the charges, as far as possible in a manner consistent with that law, so as to enable the prosecutor to remedy errors and omissions in the content of the indictment at the trial, while at the same tim

The European Commission initiated proceedings before the ECJ regarding the new disciplinary regime for judges in Poland. This regime subjects judges to disciplinary investigations, proceedings and sanctions based on the content of their rulings. By the judgment in this case, the ECJ reaffirmed that the independence of the judicial system in Poland had deteriorated and the obligations contained in Article 19 (1) TEU had been violated. According to ECJ, Article 47 of the Charter must be duly taken into consideration for the purpose of interpreting Article 19(1) TEU, because it guarantees that everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law.

In a request for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU, the Supreme Administrative Court of Portugal asked the CJEU to interpret the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The Court declared that the principle of judicial independence does not preclude general salary-reduction measures, such as those at issue in the main proceedings of the case, linked to requirements to eliminate an excessive budget deficit and to an EU financial assistance programme, from being applied to the members of the Court of Auditors of Portugal.