Documents considered by the Committee on 2 February 2011 - European Scrutiny Committee Contents


9   The EU and Serbia

(a)

(29213)

15616/07

+ ADDs 1-2

COM(07) 743

(b)

(29214)

15690/07

+ ADDs 1-2

COM(07) 744

(c)

(29427)


Draft Council Decisions on the signing and on the conclusion of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the European Communities and its Member States and the Republic of Serbia

Draft Council Decision concerning the signing and conclusion of the Interim Agreement on trade and trade-related matters between the European Community and the Republic of Serbia


Interim Political Agreement on Co-operation between the European Union and its Member States and the Republic of Serbia


Legal base

(a) and (b) Articles 300 and 310 EC; unanimity

(c) —

DepartmentForeign and Commonwealth Office
Basis of consideration Minister's letters of 20 October and 1 November 2010
Previous Committee Reports HC 428-vi (20101-11), chapter 11 (3 November 2010); also see HC 5-iii (2009-10), chapter 20 (9 December 2009); HC 19-xxvi (2008-09), chapter 21 (10 September 2009); HC 19-xxiii (2008-09), chapter 8 (8 July 2009); HC 19-ix (2008-09), chapter 11 (4 March 2009); HC 19-v (2008-09), chapter 16 (28 January 2009);HC 19-i (2008-09), chapter 17 (10 December 2008); HC16-xxiv (2007-08), chapter 15 (18 June 2008); HC16-xxi (2007-08), chapter 17 (14 May 2008); HC16-xii (2007-08), chapter 1 (20 February 2008); HC16-x (2007-08), chapter 4 (30 January 2008); and HC16-viii (2007-08), chapter 5 (16 January 2008); also see (26575) 8884/05: HC 34-i (2005-06), chapter 48 (4 July 2005); and (29103): 14999/07; (29104):15001/07; (29100):14995/07; (29099): 14993/07; (29101):14996/07; (29102):14997/07: HC 16-v (2007-08), chapter 1 (5 December 2007)
Discussed in Council25 October 2010 General Affairs Council
Committee's assessment Politically important
Committee's decisionCleared (debate on 29 April 2008); further information received

Background

9.1  The Stabilisation and Association Process was devised by the EU to bring the countries of the Western Balkans closer to the EU and to help prepare them for eventual membership. The Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) is a key step on the path to EU membership. It establishes a far-reaching legal relationship between the EU and the country concerned, entailing mutual rights and obligations; the gradual implementation of a free trade area; reforms designed to achieve the adoption of EU standards in areas such as justice, freedom and security, accompanied by formalised political dialogue; enhanced regional co-operation; and a Stabilisation and Association Council to supervise implementation.

9.2  The Commission completed negotiations for an SAA with Serbia on 10 September 2007. On 7 November 2007 Serbia and the Commission initialled the text of the Agreement.

The Council Decisions

9.3  The purpose of the first Council Decision is obtain Council approval to the text of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement and "to engage the procedures for the signature and final conclusion" of the Agreement.

9.4  The purpose of the second Council Decision is to authorise signature of an Interim Agreement (IA), comprising the Community competence elements (trade, agriculture, industrial and competition provisions of the SAA) at the same time as the SAA, to come into force as soon as possible after signature, to take account of the fact that ratification of the SAA may take up to a year following signature.

Previous consideration

9.5  The previous Committee's earlier consideration is detailed in the previous Reports listed above.[24] In brief, the previous Committee engaged in prolonged discussion with successive Ministers for Europe since January 2008 about signature of these Council Decisions and, given differences then obtaining among Member States on the signing of the Interim Agreement, an Interim Political Agreement. In the event, they were resolved among Member States in such a way that the 29 April 2008 GAERC approved the Council Decisions, whereupon the two agreements were signed. On the same day, European Committee B debated these documents and a collection of annual progress reports on the Western Balkan EU aspirants.[25]

9.6  As the previous Committee noted, it had no concerns over the nature of the SAA or of its conclusion with Serbia per se: on the contrary; however, what had bedevilled this process all along was the behaviour of the Serbian authorities with respect to the International Criminal Tribunal for (former) Yugoslavia (ICTY). Although the ICTY had been prepared to indicate to the Commission and Council that cooperation had improved sufficiently to warrant continued negotiation and, latterly, initialling of a text, it was plainly not yet able to certify that "full cooperation" obtained. The Committee's concern had thus revolved around this associated ICTY Conditionality.

9.7  As the Committee's most recent report noted, when it came to consider a letter of 1 November 2010 from the Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington), matters had by then moved on apace. The SAA had been deposited in Parliament, in August 2010, for ratification (the Minister hopes) during this parliamentary session. And the 25 October 2010 General Affairs Council (GAC) had agreed to refer Serbia's application for EU membership to the Commission for an Avis. This was presaged in a letter of 20 October from the Minister, and confirmed in his post-Council letter of 1 November. As well as confirming the Council's decision and enclosing the relevant Council Conclusions,[26] the Minister said:

"As you will see from the Conclusions, the Council reaffirmed the importance it attaches to Serbia sustaining full co-operation with the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia (ICTY). The Council agreed that before each stage of Serbia's path towards EU accession the Council must unanimously decide that full co-operation with the ICTY exists or continues to exist. The Council also agreed that it would continue closely to monitor the progress reports issued by the Office of the ICTY Chief Prosecutor. Chief Prosecutor Brammertz' next report to the United Nations Security Council will be in December.

"The Council also reiterated, in the context of progress by applicants towards the European Union, that a constructive approach to regional co-operation is essential. The Council called in particular for progress in the process of dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina under the facilitation of Baroness Ashton. This dialogue was welcomed by the United Nations General Assembly, in its resolution of 9 September 2010, as a factor for peace, security and stability in the region. Preparations for the dialogue are underway."

9.8  The Minister anticipated that the Commission will take approximately a year to complete Serbia's Avis, and said that:

"It will consider, in detail, the ability of Serbia to meet the criteria for, and assume the obligations of, EU membership. The Avis will assess whether, in the Commission's opinion, Serbia is ready to assume Candidate status and to begin accession negotiations or, if not, what further reforms would be necessary before they would be ready to begin such negotiations."

9.9  The Minister concluded his letter by noting that:

"The Government welcomes the decision of the Council to refer Serbia's application, which represents an important step forward in Serbia's relationship with the EU and the process of conditions-based enlargement to the Western Balkans region as a whole."

Our assessment

9.10   The Government's position is clear: Serbia's co-operation with ICTY has been sustained since December and Serbia is indeed fully co-operating with ICTY — that being defined as "committed and sustained activity demonstrating one hundred percent effort and political will". On the key issue — the apprehension of the two most egregious fugitives, Ratko Mladic and Goran Hadzic — we felt that it might be argued that the ICTY Chief Prosecutor seemed somewhat less convinced, viz the concluding paragraph of his assessment:

"50. The Serbian Government must give its full support to the operational services that have been tasked with tracking and apprehending the fugitives. Ongoing financial, logistical and political support is imperative. There can be no alternative to the immediate arrest of the two remaining fugitives, Ratko Mladic and Goran Hadzic."

9.11   For our part, we noted that the next stage would be when the Commission Communication containing the Commission Avis was presented for scrutiny.

9.12  In the meantime, we reported this further information to the House because of its centrality in the enlargement process, not just here but in the case of Croatia, in the hope that this would allow those Members who were interested to make up their own minds, and use the SAA ratification process and other avenues open to them to question the Government further, should they so wish.

The Minister's letter of 25 January 2011

9.13  The Minister begins by referring to the October 2010 GAC Conclusions, which he says "reaffirmed the importance it attaches to Serbia sustaining full co-operation with the ICTY." He recalls that the GAC agreed that before each stage of Serbia's path towards EU accession, the Council must unanimously decide that full co-operation with the ICTY exists or continue to exist, and that the Council agreed to monitor closely the Chief Prosecutor's Progress Reports.

9.14  He then says that he wishes to update the Committee in the light of The Chief Prosecutor's report to the United Nations Security Council on 6th December, which included an assessment of Serbia's co-operation, which he does as follows:

"Overall, the judgement of the report is the same as his last report in June. Serbia is showing good support to existing trials, by responding efficiently to requests from the Office of the Prosecutor, and providing and protecting witnesses. No requests are outstanding.

"The Prosecutor notes that Serbia must continue in its efforts to apprehend the remaining fugitives. Serbia has made strides in implementing the recommendations the Prosecutor had set out in his previous report, and co-operation between the Office of the Prosecutor and the Serbian Authorities had intensified in the intervening six months. The Prosecutor, however, continues to call for the political willingness and support for the Operational Services to be translated into concrete results and for a continued, and urgent, review of operational management of the search for the fugitives. We support him in these calls, and continue to encourage Serbia in their efforts to capture the remaining two fugitives. The capture, arrest and delivery to The Hague of the remaining fugitives should continue to be a key state objective of the Serbian Government through ensuring full support to Serbia's operational services."

9.15  The Minister concludes his letter by saying:

"Given the similar conclusions of this December report to Brammertz' report in June, it is our assessment that Serbia is continuing to co-operate fully with the ICTY."

Conclusion

9.16   We are reporting this further information to the House for the same reasons as when we reported on the Minister's previous letter.

9.17  In so doing, we note that, in contrast to that last occasion, the Minister has not provided the relevant passages of Mr Brammertz report which, as we noted at the time, suggested that the ICTY Chief Prosecutor might have been somewhat less convinced about the wholehearted support of the Serbian authorities. Now, the Minister says "Serbia has made strides in implementing the recommendations the Prosecutor had set out in his previous report, and co-operation between the Office of the Prosecutor and the Serbian Authorities had intensified in the intervening six months". But it is not clear whether this is his summation of Mr Brammertz report, or whether he is quoting from it. Nor do we have any indication of what these "strides" might be.

9.18  Looking at Mr Brammertz's statement[27] — the relevant extract from which we reproduce at Annex 2 of this chapter of our Report — it is plain that this is the Minister's interpretation, and that it might be thought to be somewhat more sanguine than Mr Brammertz's. Nowhere does the latter refer to any "strides" in implementing his recommendations. Instead, with regard to Mladic and Hadzic, he says: "Serbia must bridge the gap between its stated commitment to the arrests and the effectiveness of its operations on the ground. Time is passing and we are not seeing results"; and though the authorities are, he says, working on the implementation of his recommendations, "there is still much to be done and the progress must be faster" and "Overall, Serbia needs to adopt a more pro-active approach to arresting the fugitives."

9.19  We accordingly ask that, when the Minister writes again after the next Brammertz report, he encloses the relevant extracts, in the way that he did last November, so that we and interested Members can form a judgment as to whether "Serbia is continuing to co-operate fully with the ICTY."

Annex 1: 25 October 2010 General Affairs Council Conclusions on Serbia

The Council adopted the following conclusions:

"1. On 22 December 2009, President Mr Boris Tadic presented the application of the Republic of Serbia for membership of the European Union. The Council decided to implement the procedure laid down in Article 49 of the Treaty on the European Union. Accordingly, the Commission is invited to submit its opinion.

"2. Recalling the renewed consensus on enlargement as expressed in the conclusions of the European Council of 14/15 December 2006, the Council reaffirms that the future of the Western Balkans lies in the European Union. It reiterates that each country's progress towards the European Union depends on its individual efforts to comply with the Copenhagen criteria and the conditionality of the Stabilisation and Association Process.

"3. The Council reiterates that a constructive approach towards regional cooperation is essential. The Council also calls for progress in the process of dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina, under the facilitation of the EU and its High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, welcomed in the United Nations General Assembly resolution of 9 September 2010 as a factor for peace, security and stability in the region.

"4. The Council recalls that Serbia's full cooperation with ICTY is already required by the Stabilisation and Association Agreement, as well as by the Interim Agreement. In line with the political criteria of Copenhagen full cooperation with ICTY is an essential condition for membership of the EU. In the context of Serbia's application for membership of the European Union on 22 December 2009, the EU underlines that at each stage of Serbia's path towards EU accession, following the decision referred to in paragraph 1, further steps will be taken when the Council unanimously decides that full co-operation with the ICTY exists or continues to exist. In this context, the Council will closely monitor the progress reports by the Office of the Prosecutor. The EU and its Member States recall their readiness to assist Serbia in this respect.

"5. The Council calls upon Serbia to implement recommendations presented by the ICTY Office of the Prosecutor to the United Nations Security Council in June 2010 concerning Serbia's support in ongoing trials and appeals and Serbia's assistance in the key matter of the arrest of the two remaining fugitives, Ratko Mladic and Goran Hadzic, which would be the most convincing proof of Serbia's efforts and cooperation with the ICTY."

Annex 2: Extract from the ICTY Chief Prosecutor's Address to the UN Security Council on 6 December 2010

"When it comes to Serbia, co-operation in our ongoing cases is proceeding well. Serbia is facilitating our requests for access to documents and archives and witness related issues are being handled satisfactorily.

"However, Serbia's failure to capture the two remaining fugitives — Ratko Mladiæ and Goran Hadžiæ — is one of our foremost concerns. Serbia must bridge the gap between its stated commitment to the arrests and the effectiveness of its operations on the ground. Time is passing and we are not seeing results. In our last Completion Strategy Report, we made a number of recommendations aimed at improving the effectiveness of Serbia's efforts to capture the fugitives. In my trip to Serbia this past November, I saw that the authorities are working on the implementation of our recommendations. But there is still much left to be done and the progress must be faster.

"Overall, Serbia needs to adopt a more pro-active approach to arresting the fugitives. At the heart of this more pro-active approach should be a comprehensive strategy that integrates all relevant actors and covers all possible angles for exerting positive pressure towards the arrests. For example, in addition to the search activities, there must be a rigorous approach to dealing with individuals or networks that support the fugitives in their efforts to evade justice. The Serbian authorities must clearly signal that those who harbour the fugitives will be punished.

"Serbia holds the key to arresting Ratko Mladiæ and Goran Hadžiæ. These fugitives can be brought to justice if all relevant actors are sufficiently committed and effectively work together to bring it about."



24   See headnote. Back

25   See http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmgeneral/euro/080429/80429s01.htm for the record of that debate. Back

26   Reproduced at Annex 1 of this chapter of our Report, and available at http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/EN/genaff/117314.pdf.  Back

27   Available at http://www.icty.org/x/file/Press/Statements%20and%20Speeches/Prosecutor/101206_proc_brammertz_un_sc_en.pdf.  Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2011
Prepared 15 February 2011