The Council of Europe's advisory body on constitutional law approved the assessment at a plenary session in Venice on Friday.
Poland's Deputy Justice Minister Maria Ejchart and Jacek Saryusz-Wolski, an adviser to President Karol Nawrocki, travelled to Venice for the session.
Commission members told the Polish Press Agency (PAP) the debate on the opinion was "unusually lengthy".
How the review came about
The assessment of a Polish draft law aimed at addressing the status of so-called 'neo-judges', appointed between 2018 and 2025 through what critics say was a politicised process, was published in late February.
The Commission broadly backed the legislation's aims, acknowledging that the scale of irregularities Poland faces in restoring the rule of law is "unprecedented".
But it flagged several areas where the proposals fall short.
The review proceeded despite Poland's new Justice Minister, Waldemar Żurek, who replaced Adam Bodnar last summer, withdrawing the draft from the Commission's consideration.
The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe stepped in to request the assessment independently, prompting a Commission delegation to visit Poland before issuing the opinion.
Key recommendations
The Commission said the draft legislation pursues two closely linked objectives: restoring the rule of law by addressing the status of judges irregularly appointed through the reformed National Council of the Judiciary (KRS) in 2017, and implementing European Court of Human Rights rulings that call for swift resolution of both the judges' status and decisions they have issued.
One of the chief concerns is the treatment of judges facing transfer or removal.
The Commission recommended that – with possible exceptions for judges from two controversial Supreme Court chambers – those affected should remain in post until fresh appointment competitions are completed.
Those competitions must include explicit criteria assessing candidates' commitment to judicial independence and political neutrality, with outcomes subject to court scrutiny and approval.
The Commission also said that anyone seeking to reopen a case on the grounds that it was heard by an improperly appointed judge would need to show the involvement actually affected the outcome, raising the bar against a potential flood of legal challenges.
A note of caution was also sounded over plans to allow public bodies to challenge final administrative court rulings on the same basis as private citizens.
The Venice Commission, formally known as the European Commission for Democracy through Law, was established in 1990.
Its opinions are not legally binding, but carry significant weight with European institutions.
(ał)
Source: PAP