BRUSSELS – EU mechanisms for tackling rule of law reforms in the Western Balkans have improved in recent years, but greater efforts are still needed for real changes to take place, concluded participants in the roundtable “Assessing the EU rules for the rule of law in the Balkans”, which took place yesterday at the European Policy Centre.
The discussion was organized on the occasion of the publication of the Balkans in Europe Policy Advisory Group (BiEPAG) policy study. “Strengthening the rule of law in the Western Balkans: call for a revolution against particularism” written by BiEPAG members Jovana Marović, Tena Prelec and Marko Kmezić. It was moderated by Corina Stratulatsenior policy analyst at the European Policy Centre, who stressed that although the EU has strengthened its democratic conditions, there is still much to be done in the region, some parts of which are experiencing democratic backsliding.
According to the first speaker on the panel, Sabine Zwaenepoel, Senior Expert Coordinator at the Thematic Expertise Center on Rule of Law and Fundamental Rights of the European Commission DG NEAR, this topic is very much in the center of attention both in the region and in Europe. “I was in Belgrade in December and I will be in London and Pristina in February to discuss the same topic,” she said.
Although it can be recognized that there is a gap between the areas of rule of law provided for in the EU’s founding treaties and the toolbox to solve this problem, the latter is evolving, Zwaenepoel stressed.
She gave several examples of the EU’s growing capacity to encourage reforms in candidate countries – from the “fundamentals first” approach and the status of Chapters 23 and 24, as well as their interim criteria, to to the financial influence of the EU and its ability to stop negotiations at any time. moment if there is no progress.
Zwaenepoel also reminded the audience of the 2018 EU-Western Balkans Strategy, which gave the region a clear European perspective, but not blind control, with the rule of law being one of the main demands. “The negotiation process has become more rigorous and more comprehensive, but it is strict and fair and the entire timetable is in the hands of the candidate countries,” she concluded.
The panel was then addressed by Tena Prelect, a researcher at the London School of Economics and one of the authors of the study. She stressed the need to find ways for reforms to persist even if they are implemented.
The consequences of the absence of the rule of law can and will also be felt in the EU, either in the form of a form of “spillover” of organized crime, or in the form of increasing immigration from Western Balkans. The study shows that economic reasons are not the only ones that explain people’s decisions to leave their countries, Prelec explained. It is also about the feeling that there is no meritocracy, directly linked to an underdeveloped rule of law. Relations between Western Balkan countries and autocracies such as Russia and China also tend to grow due to potentially corrupt trade deals. It is therefore in the EU’s interest to focus seriously on this issue, she concluded.
Benchmarks are not clear and precise, and available instruments are insufficient and often underutilized, Prelec said. For example, Kosovo did not benefit from visa liberalization, even though it met all the necessary criteria. The action plans are very unsustainable and have not been updated in Serbia and Montenegro for years, she added.
Prelec also stressed that free and fair elections remain out of reach in the majority of Western Balkan countries. “The rules of the game are skewed in favor of the elites,” she stressed, citing the abuse of public resources and media domination of public officials as some of the main problems in this area.
Marko Kmezicsenior researcher at the Center for Southeast European Studies at the University of Graz and member of BiEPAG, another author of the study, said that if current trends continue, we cannot expect for the Western Balkans to become EU success stories ten years after their accession.
The most important question, he says, is how to make reforms last, and the biggest stumbling blocks are the political elites.
One way to ensure the internalization of reforms is to involve more actors in the process, mainly civil society organizations. “Ultimately, it is society that should ensure government transparency and accountability. But in return, the state must ensure the efficiency, effectiveness, responsiveness and inclusiveness of institutions responsible for the rule of law,” Kmezić said.
The EU should help build the capacity of these institutions and help them connect with others in the region, so that when one is in danger, others can come to its aid, he said. -he concluded.
The last speaker on the panel was Srđan Cvijić, senior policy analyst on EU external relations at the Open Society European Policy Institute. He focused on the example of Serbia, where political influence on the judicial system constitutes the greatest obstacle to the development of the rule of law.
“The government is hiding behind the (reform) process – the action plans and strategies – to mask its lack of reluctance to face this political influence,” Cvijić stressed, adding that in Serbia, trials last very long and often reach trial status. boundaries. This is particularly the case for tycoons and businessmen linked to the ruling elites.
“The general lack of efficiency of the judicial system is used as a smokescreen to deliberately delay political matters,” he added, stressing that in the current situation Serbia will not become a member of the EU d ‘by 2025, even if it reaches an agreement. with Kosovo, due to the lack of rule of law. This is a shame, because 2025 would be an achievable date if there was political will, Civijić concluded.
