New EU Enlargement Strategy Towards the Western Balkans and Its Impact on Rule of Law
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54869/syeul.2021.1.248Keywords:
enlargement policy, rule of law, Western Balkans, reform of judiciary, accession negotiationsAbstract
The rule of law is incorporated in the EU Founding Treaties and case-law of the Court of Justice of the EU and was included as a key requirement already in 1993 Copenhagen accession criteria. The EU enlargement is not only territorial increase, but also transposition of EU acquis to third countries. Since 1993, the monitoring mechanism of the rule of law reform in the EU accession countries was enhanced, including two specific negotiation chapters, Chapter 23 – judiciary and fundamental rights and Chapter 24 – justice, freedom and security. Over the last two decades, the EU was struggling to develop an adequate mechanism in this area, from mechanism for coordination and verification, to action plans for Chapter 23, to more specific tools like perception and experience surveys of the judiciary and functional reviews. Due to the challenges to measure progress and track record in the rule of law, in February 2020 the European Commission presented the new approach to EU Enlargement that aims to push reforms forward. The intention is to make the accession negotiations more credible, predictable and dynamic and criteria for assessing reforms in the accession countries will be based on the clearer criteria and more concise EU requirements. The article examines how EU enlargement policies influenced the rule of law reforms in Western Balkan countries over the years and what could be expected from the new approach. The research hypothesis is based on the correlation between Enlargement strategy towards the Western Balkans and its impact on rule of law in countries of the mentioned region. The methodological approach applied in the assessment is based on analysis of Enlargement strategy and other EU and national documents, as well as results of the work of judicial institutions in order to provide insight into the bottlenecks of the state rule of law in Western Balkan countries and enable identification of recommendations for improvement. The authors concluded that the new methodology would improve the measurability of the achieved results in the rule of law area, however, the approach might slow down the accession process of Serbia and Montenegro as a frontrunners in the process.References
Action plan for Chapter 23. Retrieved from: https://www.mpravde.gov.rs/tekst/9849/finalna-verzija-akcionog-plana-za-pregovaranje-poglavlja-23-koja-je-usaglasena-sa-poslednjim-preporukama-i-potvrdjena-od-strane-evropske-komisije-u-briselu-.php (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Albers, P. (2008). Judicial Systems in Europe Compared. In: Van Rhee, C.H. and Uzelac, A. (eds.) Civil Justice between Efficiency and Quality: From Ius Commune to the CEPEJ. Antwerp, Oxford, Portland: Intersetia, pp. 9-25.
Anderson, J., Bernstein, D. S. and Gray, C. W. (2005). Judicial Systems in Transition Economies: Assessing the Past, Looking to the Future. Washington: World Bank. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-6189-4
Annual report of the Judicial Council on overall situation in judiciary for 2020, Montenegro Judicial Council, 2021.
BTI: Transformation Index. Methodology. Available at: https://www.bti-project.org/en/methodology.html#country-selection (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Butković, H. and Samardžija, V. (2014). Challanges of continued EU enlargement to the Western Balkans – Croatia’s experience. Poznan University of Economics Review, 14(4), pp. 91-108.
Council of the EU (2021). Joint press statement EU - Western Balkans: Ministerial Forum on Justice and Home Affairs. Press release 3 December 2021. Retrieved from: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2021/12/03/joint-press-statement-eu-western-balkans-ministerial-forum-on-justice-and-home-affairs/ (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Ćemalović, U. (2020). Towards a New Strategy for EU Enlargement – Between the Wish for an Encouragement, the Reality of the Fatigue and the Treat of a Dead End. EU and Comparative Law Issues and Challenges Series (ECLIC), Vol. 4, pp. 281-298. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25234/eclic/11905. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25234/eclic/11905
European Council (2021). Application of the revised enlargement methodology to the accession negotiations with Montenegro and Serbia, 06.05.2021, Brussels: European Council. Retrieved from: https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-8536-2021-INIT/en/pdf (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Gateva, E. (2016). European Union Enlargement Conditionality. London, New York: Palgrave MacMillan. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137482433
GRECO (2019). Second compliance report – Montenegro, The fourth evaluation round Corruption prevention in respect of members of parliament, judges and prosecutors. Retrieved from: https://rm.coe.int/cetvrta-runda-evaluacije-sprecavanje-korupcije-u-odnosu-na-poslanike-s/16809a5bf3 (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Group of States against corruption (2020). GRECO’s Fourth Evaluation Round, “Corruption prevention in respect of members of parliament, judges and prosecutors” Second Compliance Report. Strasbourg: Group of States against corruption and Council of Europe. Retrieved from: https://rm.coe.int/fourth-evaluation-round-corruption-prevention-in-respect-of-members-of/1680a07e4d (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Human Rights Action and Monitoring and Research Center (2017). Report on implementation of Judicial Reform Strategy 2014-2016, HRA Montenegro, Podgorica: CEMI, April 2017. Retrieved from: https://cemi.org.me/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/IZVJE%C5%A0TAJ-O-REALIZACIJI-STRATEGIJE-REFORME-PRAVOSU%C4%90A-2014-2016.pdf (date of access: 23.11.2021).
International Commission of Jurists (2016). Serbia's Judges and Prosecutors: The Long Road to Independent Self-Governance. A Mission Report. Retrieved from: https://www.icj.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Serbia-Long-Road-to-Indep-Self-Gov-Publications-Reports-Fact-Finding-Mission-Report-2016-ENG-1.pdf (date of access: 23.11.2021.).
Kusek, J. Z. and Rist, R. (2004). Ten steps to results-based monitoring and evaluation system: a handbook for development practitioners. Washington: World Bank. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1596/0-8213-5823-5
Marić, S. and Bajić, D. (2018). EU’s Benchmarking within Chapters 23 and 24 in Accession Negotiations with Serbia – Effects and Challenges. Belgrade: European Policy Center.
Matić Bošković, M. (2017). Management of Court Performance as part of Judicial Accountability. Strani pravni život, 61(2), pp. 77-92.
Pejović, A. A. (2016). Vladavina Prava u politici prijema u Evropsku uniju. Matica Crnogorska, no 66, pp. 7-24.
Rakić Vodinelić, V., Knežević Bojović, A. and Reljanović, M. (2012). Judicial Reform in Serbia 2008-2012. Belgrade: Center for Advanced Legal Studies.
Statistical report on implementation of the Action plan for Chapter 23, July 2018. Retrieved from: https://www.mpravde.gov.rs/files/Statistical%20report%20on%20implem%20entation%20of%20AP%20for%20CH%2023.pdf (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Strategy for the Reform of the Judiciary 2019-2022, Montenegro, Podgorica: Ministry of Justice. Retrieved from: https://www.gov.me/dokumenta/deb3e3ae-7b6a-4963-9b3e-b5892118c8c8 (date of access: 23.11.2021).
The Charter of the EU Fundamental Rights 2007/C 303/01.
The Global Competitiveness Report, Retrieved from: http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_TheGlobalCompetitivenessReport2019.pdf (date of access: 23.11.2021).
The Treaty establishing the European Economic Community (EEC). Retrieved from: Text is available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=LEGISSUM:xy0023&from=EN (date of access: 23.11.2021).
The Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, 2007/C 306/1. Official Journal of the European Union, C 306/1.
Tomović, P. (2021). 'Koverta' bivšeg gradonačelnika Podgorice neće biti otvorena na Sudu. In: Radio Slobodna Evropa, March 3, 2021. Retrieved from: https://www.slobodnaevropa.org/a/koverta-biv%C5%A1eg-gradona%C4%8Delnika-podgorice-ne%C4%87e-biti-otvorena-na-sudu/31131576.html (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Transparency International (2020). Corruption perception Index 2020. Retrieved from: https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2020/index/nzl (date of access: 23.11.2021).
USAID (2018). Rule of Law Project. Assessment of the Implementation of the National Judicial Reform Strategy 2013-2018, 1 November 2018. Retrieved from: https://en.rolps.org/public/documents/upload/Assessment%20of%20the%20NJRS%20Implementation,%20short%20version,%20ENG,%20final,%2001112018.pdf (date of access: 23.11.2021).
USAID (2020). Opinion Poll Report: Citizen's Perceptions of Anti-Corruption Efforts in Serbia 2020 (III Cycle), November 2020. Retrieved from: https://www.odgovornavlast.rs/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/USAID-GAI-Citizens’-Perceptions-of-Anticorruption-Efforts-in-Serbia-2020-1.pdf (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Vebsajt RTCG (2019). ZAKON O ZAŠTITI PRAVA NA SUĐENjE U RAZUMNOM ROKU: Neophodno unapređenje Zakona jer ne daje potrebne rezultate. In: Paragraf Lex MNE. Retrieved from: https://www.paragraf.me/dnevne-vijesti/20112019/20112019-vijest2.html (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Council of Europe documents:
Venice Commission, Comments on the Provisions on the Judiciary in the Draft Constitution of the Republic of Serbia, CDL (2005) 072, Opinion No. 349/2005, 4 October 2005. Retrieved from: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/?pdf=CDL(2005)072-e (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Venice Commission, Opinion No. 405/2006, Opinion on the Constitution of Serbia, 19 March 2007, para. 60. Retrieved from: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2007)004-e (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Venice Commission, Opinion No. 921/2018, Opinion on the draft amendments to the constitutional provisions on the judiciary, 25 June 2018. Retrieved from: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2018)011-e (date of access: 23.11.2021).
European Commission documents:
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, Official Journal of the European Union, L 354/56.
Commission Decision 2006/929/EC of 13 December 2006 establishing a mechanism for cooperation and verification of progress in Bulgaria to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial reform and the fight against corruption and organised crime, Official Journal of the European Union, L 354/58.
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council, “Enlargement Strategy and Main Challenges 2012-2013”, COM(2012) 600 final. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhoodenlargement/sites/near/files/pdf/key_documents/2012/package/strategy_paper_2012_en.pdf (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, EU Enlargement Strategy, COM (2015) 611 final. Retrieved from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/HR/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52015DC0611(01)&from=EN (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the regions, 2020 Communication on EU enlargement policy. Retrieved from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/GA/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0660 (date of access: 23.11.2021)
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, A Credible Enlargement Perspective for Enhanced EU Engagement with the Western Balkans, COM (2018) 65 final. Retrieved from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52018DC0065 (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Enhancing the Accession Process – A Credible EU Perspective for the Western Balkans, COM (2020) 57 final. Retrieved from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0057&from=EN (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Cooperation and Verification Mechanism, COM(2019) 499 final. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/progress-report-romania-2019-com-2019-499_en.pdf (date of access: 23.11.2021).
European Commission (2018a). Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on Progress in Romania under the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism, COM(2018) 851 final. Retrieved from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52018DC0851&from=EN (date of access: 23.11.2021).
European Commission (2018b). Serbia 2018 Report, Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/system/files/2019-05/20180417-serbia-report.pdf (date of access: 23.11.2021).
European Commission (2020). Serbia 2020 Report Accompanying the Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Communication on EU Enlargement Policy, Brussels: European Commission. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/system/files/2020-10/serbia_report_2020.pdf (date of access: 23.11.2021).
European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (2020). European judicial systems CEPEJ Evaluation Report, Evaluation cycle (2018 data) Retrieved from: https://www.coe.int/en/web/cepej/special-file-publication-of-the-report-european-judicial-systems-cepej-evaluation-report-2020-evaluation-cycle-2018-data- (data access: 23.11.2021).
Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on Bulgaria’s progress on accompanying measures following accession, COM((2007) 377 final. Retrieved from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52018DC0851 (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on Progress Romania’s Progress on accompanying measures following accession, COM(2007)387 final. Retrieved from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A52007DC0378 (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on Progress and Verification Mechanism, COM(2018) 851 final. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/info/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/upholding-rule-law/rule-law/assistance-bulgaria-and-romania-under-cvm/reports-progress-bulgaria-and-romania_en (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on Progress in Romania under the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism, COM(2019) 499 final. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/info/policies/justice-and-fundamental-rights/upholding-rule-law/rule-law/assistance-bulgaria-and-romania-under-cvm/reports-progress-bulgaria-and-romania_en (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on progress in Bulgaria under the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism, COM(2019) 498 final. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/progress-report-bulgaria-2019-com-2019-498_en.pdf (date of access: 23.11.2021).
World Bank documents:
Functional Review of the Prosecution System in Serbia (2019). Washington: World Bank. Retrieved from: https://www.mdtfjss.org.rs/archive/file/SRB%20Prosecution%20FR%20December%202018.pdf (date of access: 23.11.2021).
Serbian Judicial Functional Review 2014. Washington: World Bank. Retrieved from: https://www.mdtfjss.org.rs/archive//file/Serbia%20Judicial%20Functional%20Review-Full%20Report.pdf (date of access: 23.11.2021).
World Bank Report (2018). Montenegro – Experiences and Perceptions of Judicial Performance. Washington: World Bank. Retrieved from: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/29813/Montenegro-Experiences-and-perceptions-of-judicial-performance-survey-on-perception-of-general-population-of-citizens-business-sector-lawyers-judges-public-prosecutors-and-court-administrative-staff.pdf?sequence=5&isAllowed=y (date of access: 23.11.2021). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1596/29813
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Slovak Yearbook of European Union Law
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The Author(s) transfers copyright to the Article to the Publisher of the Journal by the Licence Agreement.
The Author(s) retains rights specified in the Licence Agreement.
The readers may read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of all of the Article of the Journal and use them for any other lawful purpose under specified Creative Commons Licence (CC BY-NC).
