A German version of this article appeared in Suddeutsche Zeitung
The experience with the two last enlargement rounds has shown how important it is that EU accession candidates are given sufficient time and support to establish true rule of law. We are still coping with the consequences of badly enforced legal reforms.
Why is rule of law so crucial? The protection of human rights is at the heart of EU values. People living in the European Union are protected by the state and its institutions. Even if this does not work everywhere 100 percent, our level of protection is very high on a global scale. The rule of law, aimed at the protection of the individual, is the institutional implementation of the protection of civil liberties. The fact that so many people are currently coming to us from regions in the Middle East facing civil war has a lot to do with this. They know that they can find real protection here.
Rule of law, however, is more than laws and independent, functioning institutions. The essence of the rule of law lies in: an independent judiciary system; equality before the law; consistent interpretation of the law by the administration; and protection of media freedom -- all to be upheld by society at large. Parliament needs to protect these values with conviction and across parties. This is one of the reasons why it is so important that there be broad public and political support for enlargement in EU candidate countries.
The European Union should therefore launch accession negotiations with Serbia, starting with chapters 23 and 24 on the rule of law. In 2012, the EU Commission agreed on this new strategy in its approach towards accession, following previous experiences with enlargement. Serbia is the first accession candidate with whom this strategy should be applied, and following this approach in Serbia has been explicitly supported by the Bundestag.
With the opening of chapters, targets for reform are set and Serbia would receive the necessary technical and financial assistance for the implementation of these. Negotiations -- also including the other chapters -- will drag on for several years. The chapter on the rule of law should remain open until the conclusion of negotiations, because Serbia will need time -- and also pressure -- to align its justice system with EU rule of law standards. When ratifying Serbia's accession, the national and European Parliament will carefully examine this point.
Serbia has made some progress and hopes to open the first chapters by the end of the year. However, the proposed action plan on these crucial chapters has with good reason not yet been approved by the European Commission. Serbia has to considerably increase its efforts, and it needs to become more serious. Several ongoing lawsuits in Serbia raise questions with respect to the independence of the judiciary.
The successful fight against corruption within the judiciary and the administration are among the most important preconditions for a functioning constitutional state. One of the outstanding issues remains article 234 of the Serbian criminal code. Instead of conducting court proceedings under the rule of law, the vague formulation of the article on the "abuse of responsible position" currently allows for arbitrary decisions and political influence. This article has so far led to more than 2,000 charges against 4,000 people. On several occasions the EU has appealed to Serbia to reformulate this article to make it more precise.
In one of the most striking cases, the indictment against Miroslav MiškoviÄ? raises questions. Has proportionality been respected in his long pre-trial detention and his travel ban? Why was the judge, who temporarily gave Miskovic his passport back, suddenly replaced? Why is one individual picked without systematically investigating others? What is the role of politics in this case, which qualifies as a showcase trial due to its prominence?
Another example of the dubious use of judicial instruments is the case of the ombudsman Sasa Jankovic. He investigates presumably illegal actions by the secret military agency against individual political activists and politicians. The minister of defense and the majority of the assigned parliamentary committee refuse to give him information, which he is entitled to, and are hence undermining his rights. Suddenly, he is confronted with media attacks, which are based on the death of a friend 20 years ago. The close timeframe is cause for suspicion, because the defamation of politically inconvenient people is a popular instrument in authoritarian regimes. No EU accession candidate should be under such suspicion.
There are also questions around the freedom of the press. Prime Minister Vu?iÄ? publicly attacked the independent, EU co-funded. journalist network BIRN, after they published allegations of bribery against his government in a case of the allocation of a public contract. Twelve NGOs supported journalists in a letter and accused the government of basically stopping the fight against corruption.
EU membership provides the chance to stabilize the Western Balkans in the long term. One does not have to be reminded of the Yugoslav wars. The current flows of refugees show again how everything happening in the Balkans directly affects the current EU members. A political and economic disintegration, such as the current one in Macedonia, increases the risk of instability, migration, and ultimately armed conflict. Inaction is not an option and would also be detrimental to Germany.
Stabilization will, however, only work if the European Union enforces its conditions with rigor, perseverance, and the necessary support. This includes good neighborly cooperation in the Balkans as well as the substantial fight against corruption and fundamental reform of the judiciary.
In other Balkan countries we have seen that the fight against corruption and the reform of the judiciary was well imitated, but not seriously implemented. We cannot allow this to happen again in Serbia.