To reinstate what amounts to a “Soviet-style justice system”, Polish authorities have repeatedly and deliberately violated the Polish Constitution and EU law. Rather than comprehensively detailing these repeated violations, this article focuses on the EU dimension of Poland’s rule of law breakdown. Using the activation of the Rule of Law Framework by the European Commission on 13 January 2016 as a starting point, this article offers a critical five-year assessment of EU’s (in)action starting with an overview of the extent to which virtually all of the multiple problematical issues identified early on by the Commission have yet to be addressed by Polish authorities by January 2021. Regarding the Commission and the Council’s (in)action, this article argues that the Commission has systematically acted in a too little too late fashion while the Council has systematically failed to meaningfully act, with the inaction of these two EU institutions amounting, at times, to dereliction of duties. By contrast, the Court of Justice has forcefully defended judicial independence whenever an infringement case was lodged with it by the Commission. The Court of Justice’s record in preliminary ruling cases is more mixed due, in part, to the Court’s apprehension to undermine the principle of mutual trust. The article ends with a list of key lessons and recommendations which reflect the EU’s few successes and many failures highlighted in this article. It is submitted inter alia that more statements, dialogue and reports are not going to help contain, let alone solve Poland’s rule of law crisis. It is indeed no longer a crisis the EU is facing but a total breakdown in the rule of law in Poland which, in turn, represents a threat to the interconnected legal order that underpins the EU.

为了恢复所谓的“苏联式司法制度”，波兰当局屡次蓄意违反了《波兰宪法》和欧盟法律。本文没有全面详细介绍这些屡次违反的规定，而是着眼于波兰法治崩溃的欧盟层面。本文以欧洲委员会于2016年1月13日启动《法治框架》为起点，对欧盟的（行动中）行动进行了关键的五年评估，从概述了几乎所有欧盟行动的程度。波兰当局到2021年1月仍未解决委员会早先发现的多个问题性问题。关于委员会和理事会的作为（不作为），本文认为，欧洲委员会系统地采取了太少太晚的行动，而安理会却没有系统地采取有意义的行动，因为这两个欧盟机构的不作为有时会导致失职。相比之下，每当委员会向法院提起侵权诉讼时，法院都在为司法独立进行有力的辩护。法院在初步裁决案件中的记录更为复杂，部分原因是法院担心破坏互信原则。本文以一系列关键经验教训和建议结尾，这些经验教训和建议反映了欧盟在本文中强调的几项成功和失败。尤其提出，更多的声明，对话和报告将无助于遏制，更不用说解决波兰的法治危机了。