Commission Decision of 13 December 2006 establishing a mechanism for cooperation and verification of progress in Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform and the fight against corruption (notified under document number C(2006) 6569) (2006/928/EC)
Grade B
mapped from publisher markup. A grade says how a document's structure was obtained, not how reliable the law is.
Address https://gelex.eu/eli/EU/decision/2006/928@2006-12-13/en
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty on European Union,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to the Treaty of Accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania, and in particular Article 4(3) thereof,
Having regard to the Act of Accession of the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania, and in particular Articles 37 and 38 thereof,
Having regard to the opinions expressed by the Member States,
Whereas:
(1) The European Union is founded on the rule of law, a principle common to all Member States.
(2) The area of freedom, security and justice and the internal market, created by the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, are based on the mutual confidence that the administrative and judicial decisions and practices of all Member States fully respect the rule of law.
(3) This implies for all Member States the existence of an impartial, independent and effective judicial and administrative system properly equipped, inter alia, to fight corruption.
(4) On 1 January 2007, Romania will become a Member of the European Union. The Commission, whilst noting the considerable efforts to complete Romania's preparations for membership, has identified remaining issues in its Report of 26 September 2006, in particular in the accountability and efficiency of the judicial system and law enforcement bodies, where further progress is still necessary to ensure their capacity to implement and apply the measures adopted to establish the internal market and the area of freedom, security and justice.
(5) Article 37 of the Act of Accession empowers the Commission to take appropriate measures in case of imminent risk that Romania would cause a breach in the functioning of the internal market by a failure to implement the commitments it has undertaken. Article 38 of the Act of Accession empowers the Commission to take appropriate measures in case of imminent risk of serious shortcomings in Romania in the transposition, state of implementation, or application of acts adopted under Title VI of the EU Treaty and of acts adopted under Title IV of the EC Treaty.
(6) The remaining issues in the accountability and efficiency of the judicial system and law enforcement bodies warrant the establishment of a mechanism for cooperation and verification of the progress of Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform and the fight against corruption.
(7) If Romania should fail to address the benchmarks adequately, the Commission may apply safeguard measures based on Articles 37 and 38 of the Act of Accession, including the suspension of Member States' obligation to recognise and execute, under the conditions laid down in Community law, Romanian judgments and judicial decisions, such as European arrest warrants.
(8) This Decision does not preclude the adoption of safeguard measures at any time on the basis of Articles 36 to 38 of the Act of Accession, if the conditions for such measures are fulfilled.
(9) The present Decision should be amended if the Commission's assessment points at a need to adjust the benchmarks. The present Decision should be repealed when all the benchmarks have been satisfactorily fulfilled,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
Romania shall, by 31 March of each year, and for the first time by 31 March 2007, report to the Commission on the progress made in addressing each of the benchmarks provided for in the Annex. The Commission may, at any time, provide technical assistance through different activities or gather and exchange information on the benchmarks. In addition, the Commission may, at any time, organise expert missions to Romania for this purpose. The Romanian authorities shall give the necessary support in this context.
Article 2
The Commission will communicate to the European Parliament and the Council its own comments and findings on Romania's report for the first time in June 2007. The Commission will report again thereafter as and when required and at least every six months.
Article 3
This Decision shall enter into force only subject to and on the date of the entry into force of the Treaty of Accession.
Article 4
This Decision is addressed to all Member States.
Done at Brussels, 13 December 2006. For the Commission Olli Rehn Member of the Commission
ANNEX
ANNEX
Benchmarks to be addressed by Romania, referred to in Article 1:
1. Ensure a more transparent, and efficient judicial process notably by enhancing the capacity and accountability of the Superior Council of Magistracy. Report and monitor the impact of the new civil and penal procedures codes.
2. Establish, as foreseen, an integrity agency with responsibilities for verifying assets, incompatibilities and potential conflicts of interest, and for issuing mandatory decisions on the basis of which dissuasive sanctions can be taken.
3. Building on progress already made, continue to conduct professional, non-partisan investigations into allegations of high-level corruption.
4. Take further measures to prevent and fight against corruption, in particular within the local government.
Versions
Cited by
- Commission Decision (EU) 2023/1786 of 15 September 2023 repealing Decision 2006/928/EC establishing a mechanism for cooperation and verification of progress in Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform and the fight against corruption Decision · Grade B
On 13 December 2006, the Commission adopted a Decision 2006/928/EC establishing a mechanism for cooperation and verification of progress in Romania to address four specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform and the fight against corruption. That Decision states that it is to be repealed when all the benchmarks have been satisfactorily fulfilled.
- Commission Decision (EU) 2023/1786 of 15 September 2023 repealing Decision 2006/928/EC establishing a mechanism for cooperation and verification of progress in Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform and the fight against corruption Decision · Grade B
The Decision 2006/928/EC requires Romania to regularly report to the Commission on the progress made in addressing the benchmarks. The Commission communicated to the European Parliament and the Council its own comments and findings on Romania’s report for the first time in June 2007, and has reported on a regular basis since then. Each report by the Commission has been the result of a careful analysis, drawing on close cooperation with the national authorities, as well as on input from civil society, and other stakeholders and observers.
- Commission Decision (EU) 2023/1786 of 15 September 2023 repealing Decision 2006/928/EC establishing a mechanism for cooperation and verification of progress in Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform and the fight against corruption Decision · Grade B
In its report of January 2017, the Commission undertook a comprehensive assessment of the progress made by Romania since the establishment of the cooperation and verification mechanism. On that basis, the Commission set out a clear path towards the conclusion of the mechanism, based on twelve recommendations which clarified the requirements that Romania needed to comply with to satisfy the four benchmarks laid down in the Decision 2006/928/EC. Given the progress made, the Commission considered that the fulfilment of these recommendations would be sufficient to close the cooperation and verific
- Commission Decision (EU) 2023/1786 of 15 September 2023 repealing Decision 2006/928/EC establishing a mechanism for cooperation and verification of progress in Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform and the fight against corruption Decision · Grade B
The Commission report of November 2022 established that progress made by Romania under the cooperation and verification mechanism was sufficient to meet its commitments made at the time of its accession to the Union and that all four benchmarks set out in the Decision 2006/928/EC, and clarified through the twelve recommendations of the report of January 2017 and the eight additional recommendations of the report of November 2018, had been satisfactorily complied with. The Commission notably took note of the progress made by Romania in strengthening the independence and the effectiveness of the
- Commission Decision (EU) 2023/1786 of 15 September 2023 repealing Decision 2006/928/EC establishing a mechanism for cooperation and verification of progress in Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform and the fight against corruption Decision · Grade B
Therefore, all benchmarks set out in the Decision 2006/928/EC, and clarified through the twelve recommendations of the January 2017 report and the eight additional recommendations in the November 2018 report, as well as the specific commitments listed in the conclusions of the 2022 report, have been satisfactorily complied with.
- Commission Decision (EU) 2023/1786 of 15 September 2023 repealing Decision 2006/928/EC establishing a mechanism for cooperation and verification of progress in Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform and the fight against corruption Decision · Grade B
On 5 July 2023, the Commission informed the Council about its intention to repeal Decision 2006/928/EC establishing a cooperation and verification mechanism for Romania and definitively close the mechanism. This was also communicated to the European Parliament. By letter dated 26 July, the Council took note of the Commission’s intention to formally close the cooperation and verification mechanism for Bulgaria and Romania.
- Commission Decision (EU) 2023/1786 of 15 September 2023 repealing Decision 2006/928/EC establishing a mechanism for cooperation and verification of progress in Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform and the fight against corruption Decision · Grade B
Therefore the Decision 2006/928/EC should be repealed.
- Commission Decision (EU) 2023/1786 of 15 September 2023 repealing Decision 2006/928/EC establishing a mechanism for cooperation and verification of progress in Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform and the fight against corruption Decision · Grade B
The Decision 2006/928/EC is repealed.
- Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) 7 September 2023 Judgment · Grade B
This request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Article 2 TEU and the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) thereof, Article 267 TFEU, Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter), and Commission Decision 2006/928/EC of 13 December 2006 establishing a mechanism for cooperation and verification of progress in Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform and the fight against corruption (OJ 2006 L 354, p. 56).
- Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) 7 September 2023 Judgment · Grade B
The annex to Decision 2006/928 provides: Benchmarks to be addressed by Romania, referred to in Article 1: …
- Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) 7 September 2023 Judgment · Grade B
Decision 2006/928
- Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) 7 September 2023 Judgment · Grade B
According to the applicants in the main proceedings, such a change to the procedure for the promotion of judges is likely to impair the independence of judges. In particular, they argue that the new procedure is contrary to EU law and to the obligations incumbent on Romania under, inter alia, the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism (the CVM) introduced by Decision 2006/928 and the reports drawn up in connection with that mechanism.
- Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) 7 September 2023 Judgment · Grade B
Must [the CVM], established by [Decision 2006/928], be regarded as an act of an institution of the Union, within the meaning of Article 267 TFEU, and therefore amenable to interpretation by [the Court of Justice]? Do the terms, nature and duration of the CVM established by [Decision 2006/928] fall within the scope of [the Treaty of Accession]? Are the requirements laid down in the reports prepared in accordance with the CVM binding on the Romanian State?
- Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) 7 September 2023 Judgment · Grade B
In that regard, it should be noted that the present request for a preliminary ruling clearly concerns the interpretation of EU law, whether provisions of primary law (Article 2 TEU, the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU, Article 267 TFEU and Article 47 of the Charter) or provisions of secondary law (Decision 2006/928).
- Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) 7 September 2023 Judgment · Grade B
In the present case, it is apparent from the request for a preliminary ruling that the referring court is hearing a dispute relating to the lawfulness of a piece of national legislation concerning the scheme for the promotion of judges. It is precisely because that court is experiencing doubts as to the compatibility of that scheme with (i) the requirement for independence stemming from the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) TEU and from Article 47 of the Charter and (ii) Decision 2006/928 that it has been prompted to question the Court of Justice as to the interpretation of those provisions
- Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) 7 September 2023 Judgment · Grade B
By its first question, the referring court asks, in essence, whether Decision 2006/928 constitutes an act of an institution of the Union which is amenable to interpretation by the Court of Justice under Article 267 TFEU, whether that decision, as regards its legal nature, content and temporal effects, falls within the scope of the Treaty of Accession, and, lastly, whether the requirements set out in the reports drawn up by the Commission in connection with the CVM are binding on Romania.
- Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) 7 September 2023 Judgment · Grade B
Thus, the answer to the first question is that Decision 2006/928 constitutes an act of an institution of the Union which is amenable to interpretation by the Court of Justice under Article 267 TFEU. As regards its legal nature, content and temporal effects, that decision falls within the scope of the Treaty of Accession. The benchmarks set out in the annex to that decision are intended to ensure that Romania complies with the value of the rule of law, set out in Article 2 TEU, and are binding on that Member State, in the sense that it is required to take the appropriate measures for the purpos
- Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) 7 September 2023 Judgment · Grade B
By its fourth question, the referring court asks, in essence, whether Decision 2006/928 is to be interpreted as precluding a piece of national legislation altering the scheme for the promotion of judges when, in the reports drawn up under that decision, the Commission has not made any recommendation relating to such an alteration.
- Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) 7 September 2023 Judgment · Grade B
That said, as the Advocate General noted in point 83 of his Opinion, neither Decision 2006/928 nor the recommendations set out in the reports drawn up on the basis of that decision are intended to impose on the Member State concerned a specific model for the organisation of its judicial system. Indeed, as is apparent from the settled case-law of the Court as cited in paragraph 45 of the present judgment, the organisation of justice in the Member States falls within the competence of those Member States, subject to their compliance with EU law when exercising that competence.
- Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) 7 September 2023 Judgment · Grade B
In the present case, as is apparent from the Commission’s observations and as the Advocate General noted in point 81 of his Opinion, the Commission did not, in the reports drawn up by it on the basis of Decision 2006/928, identify any specific problem concerning the scheme for the promotion of judges at issue in the main proceedings; nor did it make any recommendations in that regard.