Challenge

The European Commission had started investigating violations of the rule of law in Poland, initiating infringement proceedings regarding judicial independence in the country. The Venice Commission, an advisory body to the Council of Europe, had also expressed reservations about all parts of the Polish judiciary, especially over the Polish public prosecution’s independence.

Our client, the former CEO of a Polish investment bank, was caught in the middle of this battle by being at the receiving end of disproportional measures by the prosecution in Poland. The Polish government who started treating bankers in the context of the “GetBack” scandal as “banksters” created a political climate which put our client in custody without bail. Anticipating that the Polish government wanted to represent the case as an effort to protect the public by blaming the investment bankers’ business conduct, he reached out to Alber & Geiger.

Strategy

We approached several DGs in the European Commission and all the responsible committees in the European Parliament demonstrating that this was a practical case confirming the EU concerns stated in the infringement proceedings against Poland.

We gathered thereby EU political support towards the Polish government ensuring that our client receives fair trial and proportionate treatment as to be expected from an EU member state. We did so by informing the EU institutions over the shortcomings of the legal process in Poland and the unjustifiable measures against our client, placing our case on the European Commission’s radar in the ongoing infringement proceeding against Poland and into the European Parliament’s resolution on the rule of law and democracy in Poland.

Results

By introducing the Polish court case into EU politics, Alber & Geiger was able to take Polish politics out of the courtroom. The client was released from custody on bail.

Challenge

Alber & Geiger was able to bring out the extraterritorial reach of EU human rights. This was against the backdrop of its clients having lost all available domestic remedies. The Former Minister of Economic Development of Azerbaijan and his brother were arrested on the eve of the Azerbaijani election. Initially accused of attempting a putsch, they were ultimately found liable for embezzlement. The European Court of Human Rights had held that the several of their rights had been infringed, especially the right to a fair trial. Nevertheless the Aliyevs remained imprisoned under their disproportionate and potentially wrongful sentences.

Strategy

Alber & Geiger’s strategy utilized the EU-Azerbaijan trade talks to leverage the EU institutional playmakers at opportune moments. Our litigious narrative extracted the EU’s human rights obligations underlying the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP), and demonstrated the innocence of the Aliyev’s.

Simultaneously we drew on the Aliyev’s pro-western views, showing through adversarial fact finding that this underlay their imprisonment. Substantively, we put forward that it was incumbent on the Azerbaijani authorities under these circumstances to show their commitment to the rule of law. In order to benefit from the ENP they had to play by its rules.

Results

Ultimately we secured a complete pardon for both of the Aliyevs. However, the broader reach of this mandate was the raising of awareness regarding human rights issues in Azerbaijan. This put the EU-Azerbaijani relationship on a trajectory of greater trust. The sensitive political dynamics were tackled head on and resolved with expedience.

Challenge

The patent holder of Teflon™, US Fortune 500 chemical company Chemours, approached Alber & Geiger seeking regulatory and advocacy support over a European Union proposal that would ban all per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Those PFAS are chemicals that came under regulatory fire as being the so called “forever chemicals”, which persist in the environment. The political turbulences in the EU started in the Netherlands, continued in Italy and Germany then, until they became an EU wide regulatory initiative in Brussels.

Strategy

On the one hand we were confronted with planned PFAS bans in The Hague, Rome and Berlin which we had to politically manage with the national governments. On the other hand we saw a regulatory initiative develop in Brussels under the EU chemicals strategy. We embarked on a defense for the Chemours specific PFAS named GenX and Teflon™, based on the planned PFAS restrictions. Considering the impact of the restrictions to the supply chains of various Member States, Alber & Geiger entered into discussions with the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), the European Commission, the European Parliament, the EU Permanent Representations and the Member States’ Ministries of Industry and Environment.

Results

We managed to stop the national PFAS bans in The Hague, Berlin and Rome. And we aligned them with the EU initiative. There, we made EU regulators and lawmakers understand that they needed to differentiate between different PFAS, such as PFAS of high or low concern, as a liquid, gas or solid material.