65 EU Enlargement: Bulgaria, Romania
and Croatia
| (a)
(31824)
12558/10
+ ADD1
COM(10) 400
(b)
(31825)
12562/10
+ ADD 1
COM(10) 401
|
Commission Report on progress in Bulgaria under the Co-operation and Verification Regime
Commission Report on progress in Romania under the Co-operation and Verification Regime
|
| Legal base | —
|
| Documents originated | 20 July 2010
|
| Deposited in Parliament | 26 July 2010
|
| Department | Foreign and Commonwealth Office
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 27 July 2010 and Minister's letter of 20 June 2010
|
| Previous Committee Report | None; but see (31436)7947/10 and (31437)
7948/10: HC 5-xviii (2009-10), chapter 7 (7 April 2010); (30828) 12386/09 and (30829) 12388/09: HC 19-xxvi (2008-09), chapter 22 (10 September 2009); (30347) 6405/09 and (30348) 6407/09: HC 19-xvii (2008-09), chapter 8 (13 May 2009), HC 19-xiv (2008-09), chapter 6 (22 April 2009) and HC 19-xii (2008-09), chapter 3 (25 March 2009); also see (29876) 12177/08 and (29877) 12182/08 HC 16-xxix (2007-08), chapter 2 (10 September 2008); (29431) 6150/08 and (29432) 6161/08 HC 16-xiii (2007-08), chapter 15 (27 February 2008); (28754) 11491/07 and (28768) 11489/07 HC 41-xxxii (2006-07), chapter 11 (25 July 2007) and (27865) 13347/06: HC 34-xxxviii (2005-06) chapter 3 (18 October 2006)
|
| To be discussed in Council | 13 September 2010 General Affairs Council
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
Background
65.1 The accession negotiations with Romania and Bulgaria
were concluded in December 2004 and a Treaty of Accession was
signed on 25 April 2005. The UK ratified the Treaty on 5 April
2006.
65.2 The Commission's October 2005 and May 2006 monitoring
reports identified a number of areas where further improvements
were needed in order to meet all membership requirements, and
all of which went to the heart of a properly functioning governance
system based on the effective implementation of laws by an accountable,
independent and effective judiciary and bureaucracy. The Accession
Treaty allowed for a delay until 2008, but only if the Commission
recommended that either country was "manifestly unprepared"
for membership. The Commission's final verdict was that both countries
would be in a position to take on the responsibilities of membership
by 2007.
65.3 There were, however, still significant shortcomings,
particularly on JHA issues.[284]
So, various post-accession measures were put in place, the most
crucial being the Mechanism on Cooperation and Verification (CVM)
— a process whereby, having set benchmarks on JHA issues,
the Commission works closely with both governments on steps to
meet them, and reports to the European Parliament and the Council,
with the sanction of non-recognition of judicial decisions under
mutual recognition arrangements if progress was insufficient.[285]
Accession on 1 January 2007 was now essentially a fait accompli;
however, given the range of outstanding issues and their implications
for actual and aspiring candidates, the Commission's final verdict
was debated in the European Standing Committee on 15 January 2007.[286]
65.4 Bulgaria's benchmarks are:
— Benchmark
1 — Independence/ accountability of judicial system
— Benchmark
2 — Transparency/efficiency of judicial process
— Benchmark
3 — Reform of the judiciary
— Benchmark
4 — High level corruption
— Benchmark
5 — Corruption at borders and in local government
— Benchmark
6 — Organised crime
65.5 Romania's benchmarks are:
— Benchmark
1 — Reform of judicial process
— Benchmark
2 — Establishment of an integrity agency
— Benchmark
3 — Investigation of high level corruption
— Benchmark
4 — Corruption, in particular within local government
65.6 The Commission monitors progress and writes
reports every 6 months: interim reports at the start of the year
and main reports at mid-year. The previous Committee's consideration
of earlier reports is enumerated in the headnote; the most recent
being the Commission's interim reports of March 2010.[287]
65.7 The main reports provide an over-view of progress,
while the accompanying technical reports detail progress on each
benchmark since the last full report in July 2009.
Bulgaria
65.8 In this year's report the Commission points
to "a strong reform momentum which has been established in
Bulgaria" since the July 2009 annual report, and says that
the new strategy for judicial reform "demonstrates the existence
of a strong political will in Bulgaria to achieve a deep and lasting
reform of the judiciary". The report also recommends that
Bulgaria improve judicial practice in order to allow the judiciary
to act more pro-actively and to show a stronger sense of responsibility.
It says that important reforms of its penal procedures have been
adopted. Legislation to strengthen asset forfeiture and to improve
protection against conflict of interest is under discussion. The
structural set-up of the prosecution to deal with fraud and organised
crime has been strengthened. Organised crime is actively tackled
for the first time since the inception of the CVM. In June the
Government adopted "an ambitious and far-reaching strategy
which provides a blue-print for a comprehensive, long term reform
of the judiciary", and the most pressing reforms to improve
the efficiency, accountability and consistency of the judicial
process "are in the process of consultation within the Government."
The strong push for reform by the Government is showing some results;
allegations of corruption within the judiciary are receiving a
stronger disciplinary and criminal response than in the past;
the number of indictments for organised crime has increased, severe
sentences were pronounced, but not yet enforced, in a case involving
large scale fraud of EU funds in April and June.
65.9 At the same time, the Commission's analysis
shows that important deficiencies remain in judicial practice
both at the level of the prosecution and at the level of the court.
The judicial process in Bulgaria lacks initiative and professional
capacity. Complex investigations show a lack of direction and
purpose, procedures are too formal and too long and often fail
in court. There are continuing shortcomings regarding the prevention
of corruption and protection against conflict of interest. Effective
implementation of the new national anti-corruption strategy adopted
in November 2009 has not yet started. The implementation of the
conflict of interest law is insufficiently effective. Shortcomings
in the implementation of public procurement procedures are widespread.
To strengthen the prevention of corruption and conflict of interest,
Bulgaria should pursue its plans to create a special and independent
commission for protection against conflict of interest, accelerate
the implementation of the action plan for the national anti-corruption
strategy and strengthen legislation on asset forfeiture.
65.10 The Commission concludes its report with a
further 11 recommendations covering Reform of the Judiciary, the
Fight against Organised Crime and the Fight against Corruption.
Success, the Commission says, will require a sustained commitment
by Bulgaria, the Commission and other Member States. For now,
"Bulgaria has established a new partnership with the Commission
and improved the quality of its reporting on progress under the
CVM. The Commission will continue to support Bulgaria in achieving
further progress under the CVM and provide its next assessment
in summer 2011."
65.11 In his accompanying Explanatory Memorandum
of 27 July 2010, the Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington)
describes the situation under each Benchmark as follows:
"Benchmark 1:
Independence/accountability of the judicial system: The
report focuses on the work of the Inspectorate of the Supreme
Judicial Council (ISCJ), noting that inspections have taken place
in four of Bulgaria's five appellate regions, issuing recommendations
and following up on compliance where appropriate. The report notes
that the newly institutionalised Commission on the Analysis and
Follow-up to the ISJC Recommendations has oversight of the implementation
of the measures recommended by the ISCJ, which is then controlled
by follow-up inspections as recommended in the last Commission
reports. The report also finds that between August 2009 and May
2010, a total of 70 disciplinary proceedings against members of
the judiciary and magistracy were completed, with 13 sanctions
imposed.
"Benchmark 2:
Transparency/efficiency of judicial process: In response
to a Commission recommendation in July 2009, the Government has
adopted several amendments to the Penal Procedure Code (PPC).
The amendments are designed to avoid undue delays in hearings,
extend investigative powers to police, streamline and simplify
the pre-trial phase, and enhance the rights of defendants and
victims, including through provision for translation of documents.
However, the report finds that some concerns around the administration
of evidence remain and the Penal Procedure remains excessively
formalised. The report notes changes to plea bargaining, which
Bulgaria claims has helped to speed up judicial proceedings, but
recommends that Bulgaria should continue to monitor the effect
of the new provisions to ensure sanctions are not too lenient.
The report summarises the thematic inspections used to monitor
the codes and finds that close monitoring of the PPC will need
to continue to ensure effective implementation. Further legislative
amendments have been prepared to the Administrative Procedure
Code, to help the balancing of administrative courts' workloads,
and the Judicial System Act, to further improve transparency and
accountability. Steps have been taken to enhance the unification
of jurisprudence through the publication of rulings of the Supreme
Cassation Court (SCC) and the Supreme Administrative Court (SAC).
Training of judges and regular meetings on unification of jurisprudence
are being pursued. Finally, the report notes that steps have been
taken to prepare reform of the Penal Code, including through public
consultation. The report reiterates the urgency of reform to the
Penal Code and notes that this is an outstanding recommendation
from the 2009 reports.
"Benchmark 3: Reform
of the judiciary: The report summarises the action taken by
the Bulgarian Government in adopting its comprehensive strategy
for reform of the judiciary, which focussed on three priority
objectives: better management and good governance within the judiciary,
placing citizens in the centre, and countering corruption in the
judicial system. The report notes that the strategy received broad
support in the judiciary, civil society and from politicians,
and stresses that its success depends now on full implementation.
Reforms have been made to enhance the transparency and professionalism
of appointments to senior positions, but the report notes it is
too early to assess the impact of these. Since July 2009, a number
of important cases of trade in influence affected the reputation
of the Bulgarian judiciary. The response of the disciplinary and
judicial authorities has been mixed, with some disciplinary proceedings
taking place but no criminal investigations launched.
"A central web-based interface for publishing
judicial acts will add value in harmonising jurisprudence. However,
the July 2009 recommendation for all courts to publish their judgements
online has not yet been fulfilled, with only partial compliance
noted.
"Benchmark 4: High
level corruption: The report finds that efforts to fight high-level
corruption have been stepped up, with cases against former ministers,
former MPs and other high level officials being initiated and
some reaching court. At a central level, the inter-ministerial
Commission for the Prevention and Counteraction of Corruption
has been given a new mandate and extended role. Further work is
required to monitor the progress of this Commission. There continues
to be a lack of effective administrative-level control in preventing
and tackling fraud, although the institutions managing EU funds
have made certain improvements. On conflicts of interest, the
report finds that few cases are being sanctioned and that guidelines
on the conflict of interest law, as recommended in the 2009 report,
have yet to be developed. An agency to prevent conflicts of interest,
also recommended by the Commission, is foreseen for 2011. Commission
recommendations to protect whistle-blowers remain unaddressed.
The joint teams on EU fraud have achieved better results in terms
of number of cases in pre-trial proceedings, indictments and court
sentences compared to 2009. Severe sentences in two cases related
to EU funds were issued. However, the report details a number
of areas where investigation of fraud needs further improvement
and concludes that penalties for EU fraud remain low compared
to other MS.
"Benchmark 5: Corruption
at borders and in local government: An action plan was adopted
on 17 March to assist the implementation of the strategy on corruption
and organised crime. Implementation of the action plan was decided
by the Government in June. It is too early to assess the impact
at this stage. The Ministry of Interior has implemented preventative
measures in the form of awareness raising campaigns and better
identification at the border checkpoints. Initiatives to combat
local level corruption have also been implemented. The report
notes specific initiatives undertaken to help tackle corruption
in the fields of health and education. It also notes that steps
have been taken towards prosecutions into cases of vote buying
at 2009 EU and parliamentary elections. The report also sets out
the results of the Commission's analysis on controls over public
procurement, which revealed significant shortcomings. It further
notes that control bodies lack capacity and recommends establishing
inspections to address the most blatant irregularities.
"Benchmark 6: Organised
crime: The report notes that a number of operations have been
carried out by the Ministry of Interior, targeting organised groups
involved in kidnapping, prostitution and drug dealing. A number
of arrests of well-known figures of organised crime groups have
been made and there has been an increase in indictments in organised
crime cases. The main defendant in a SAPARD (EU funding for agriculture
projects) money laundering case has been sentenced to 10 years
imprisonment. Work has begun on a unified information system for
combating crime to connect the databases of the Ministry of Interior,
the prosecution and the courts. This is expected to be operational
in 2013. A number of other reforms have been started or implemented.
These include: making permanent the joint teams specialising in
organised crime and corruption; creating specialised units within
five district courts; structural reforms to the State Agency for
National Security and the Ministry of Interior, and; a draft law
facilitating the forfeiture of assets derived from illegal activities."
ROMANIA
65.12 The main report notes that although there have
been some positive achievements over the last six months there
have been some serious shortcomings in Romania's efforts to achieve
progress. During the second quarter of 2010, judicial reform has
shown important progress with Parliament adopting the Civil and
Criminal Procedural Codes, the publication of a draft multi-annual
strategy for the development of justice and the preparation of
a draft "Small Reforms Law". However, the report notes
a lack of broad-based political commitment to support and provide
direction to the reform process, and a degree of unwillingness
in parts of the judiciary to cooperate and take responsibility.
It notes that, with the exceptions of the examples above, there
has been limited effective progress on judicial reform in the
areas of: efficiency of procedures; consistency of jurisprudence,
and accountability of the judiciary. In the area of anti-corruption,
the report further notes that the draft National Integrity Agency
(ANI) law proposed by the Senate, the Upper House of Parliament,
renders the agency toothless. (ANI is the body set up to monitor
wealth statements of parliamentarians and senior public sector
officials, and had been making steady progress.) With the ANI
having previously been fully operational, the proposed new law
represents a backward step in the fight against corruption. The
report states that this is in breach of the commitments Romania
had taken upon accession. In its conclusions, the Commission calls
upon Romania to establish close and constructive cooperation between
the different political and judicial actors necessary to ensure
success in the reform progress.
65.13 In his accompanying Explanatory Memorandum
of 27 July 2010, the Minister for Europe describes the reports
on Romania as "the most critical of any of those published
since the mechanism began"; notes that, while the reports
note some areas of progress, including the passing of new civil
and criminal procedural codes, they conclude that Romania's performance
in the past year has been disappointing and that there are key
shortcomings in terms of political commitment to reform; also
notes that the reports are particularly critical of the Romanian
parliament's decision to strip the National Integrity Agency (ANI)
of some of its powers, calling it a "clear breach of its
Accession commitment"; and that Recommendations made by the
reports include structural adjustments of the judiciary and "thorough
reform" of the disciplinary system, and further reforms against
corruption, including in the field of public procurement.
65.14 The Minister goes on to note that, although
both the Bulgarian and Romanian governments would like the CVM
to be lifted, "there is unlikely to be significant pressure
from either country for this to happen this year" and that
he supports keeping the CVM in place until all benchmarks are
met.
65.15 The Minister then summarises the situation
under each benchmark as follows:
"Benchmark 1.
Reform of judicial process. The Civil and Criminal Procedure
Codes were adopted by parliament on 22 June and promulgated by
the President on 30 June. However, further work is necessary before
all four codes enter into force, including on the implementing
laws which have been sent to parliament for debate. The report
notes that progress on the recommendation to conduct an impact
assessment for the four codes has been minimal. The "Small
Reforms Law" to be debated by parliament should advance the
implementation of some reforms included in the procedural codes.
It should also progress the recommendation to streamline the procedure
for appeals. Staffing of the judiciary remains a concern. Vacancies
have reduced slightly but there are questions as to whether recently
appointed magistrates who have not graduated through the National
Institute of Magistracy (NIM) are as well prepared as NIM graduated
colleagues. The response to the 2009 recommendations to transfer
vacancies to higher priority areas has been mixed. There has been
progress on structural reforms to maximise the efficiency of existing
personnel. The report urges the review of the geographic distribution
of personnel and the possibility of a certain level of specialisation
of judges.
"The Superior Council
of Magistracy (SCM) has taken some steps towards more transparency
by publishing decisions online. However, concerns remain over
transparency, objectivity and thoroughness of interviews to promote
judges to the High Court of Cassation and Justice (HCCJ). Concerns
also remain over the handling of disciplinary investigations and
decisions reached by the SCM.
"Benchmark 2: Establishment
of an integrity agency: On 14 April the Constitutional Court
found substantial and significant parts of law 144/2007 on the
National Integrity Agency (ANI) unconstitutional (although the
conclusion was not unanimous). As a result, the government put
forward a new law on the ANI, which was adopted on 12 May. This
was widely criticised by practitioners and civil society, and
the President subsequently decided not to promulgate the law.
However, on 30 June, the Senate (the upper house of Romania's
Parliament) adopted the law again with only minor amendments.
As a result, the control of assets, a fundamental element in the
ANI's original competence, has been lost. The ANI, which has had
a good track record in directly taking cases of unjustified wealth
to court, has now been deprived of this ability, having to refer
them firstly to the tax authorities or prosecutors. This important
deterrent and sanction for corruption has therefore been lost.
The new law includes a host of other amendments which weaken the
effectiveness of the ANI's legal framework. The report notes that
up until the passing of the new law, the ANI had been able to
consolidate its institutional base, consolidate improvements in
staffing and its operational track record, and therefore notes
that it is imperative that the new law is amended. The Commission's
report is highly critical of the Senate's proposed law, saying
that it "breaches commitments taken by Romania upon accession."
The ANI had previously strengthened case management processes,
including monitoring the timely follow up by judicial and disciplinary
bodies of cases submitted.
"Benchmark 3: Investigation
of high level corruption: The National Anti-corruption Directorate
(DNA) has maintained its stable and convincing track record of
investigations into allegations of high-level corruption and a
significant number of cases were sent to court. Overall, encouraging
conviction rates have been achieved. The courts have demonstrated
an increasing tendency to apply more severe sentencing, including
imprisonment, although this trend has not been followed through
at the final judgement stage. Concerns remain regarding the length
of the trial phase in high-level corruption cases. The recommendation
to apply the procedure for allowing criminal investigations of
parliamentarians has only partially been fulfilled. On the positive
side, the co-operation between the DNA and other relevant institutions
is considered to be effective and challenges to the constitutionality
of the DNA's legislature have so far been rejected by the Constitutional
Court. The report notes that additional in-service training courses
on fighting corruption have been scheduled. The recommendation
to allow the criminal court to resolve illegality exceptions and
to limit the application of suspended sentences is also being
addressed. Further work is needed on the individualisation of
penalties for corruption.
"Benchmark 4: Further
measures against corruption including in local government:
Some steps have been taken to strengthen co-ordination of
the National Anti-Corruption Strategy for Vulnerable Sectors and
for Local Public Administration. This strategy is now in its final
months. However, despite a few additional measures proposed, the
enhanced co-ordination does not so far appear to have developed
to the stage of delivering better identification of vulnerable
activities or corruption risks, nor mitigating actions. The report
also notes that the real impact of individual actions remain unclear,
which makes it difficult to ascertain which measures are actually
working or need further attention. Efforts have been made to step
up prevention measures in certain sectors. In the wider public
administration, the Central Unit of Public Administration Reform
(CUPAR) of the Ministry of Administration and Interior (MAI) has
developed a guide on simplification of procedures and facilitated
external expertise to identify procedures for the simplification
in several public agencies. The Ministry of Education, which has
identified a systemic weaknesses arising from specific corruption
cases, is procuring an information system aimed at reducing corruption
in the diploma system. However, overall, prevention measures need
to be intensified across public institutions. There is a need
to strengthen co-operation between the Fraud Investigation Service
of the police and prosecutors in fraud cases. MAI has secured
financing for the National Integrity Agency to consolidate anti-corruption
efforts, and steps by the General Prosecutor to tackle low and
medium-level corruption are beginning to deliver results. Concerns
remain on public procurement, where the report describes a number
of weaknesses in practice and the institutional structure. Conflict
of interest legislation is insufficient and complex. Competent
authorities demonstrate only limited activity aimed at preventing
and detecting conflict of interest."
The Government's view
65.16 The Minister endorses the Commission's "thorough
reports", which he says demonstrate how the mechanism "continues
to play an essential role in guiding Romania's and Bulgaria's
efforts in delivering these fundamental reforms, which are essential
for public confidence and underpin their further integration into
the EU."
65.17 He notes a divergence in progress over the
past year between the two countries. With respect to Bulgaria,
the Minister says:
"We welcome the Bulgarian government's strong
demonstration of political will and commitment to reform, whilst
acknowledging that there remain serious problems, especially in
the fields of organised crime and the judiciary. The development
of a strategy for judicial reform is promising and we urge the
Bulgarian government to implement this to achieve the serious
reform required."
65.18 With regard to Romania, the Minister
says:
"Whilst acknowledging there has been some progress
in Romania, we share the Commission's disappointment at the serious
shortcomings over the past year. We are particularly concerned
at the Senate's decision to strip the National Integrity Agency
(ANI) of some of its powers. However, it is also important to
note that President Basescu has realised that this draft ANI law
is ineffective and has not signed it into law. We urge the Romanian
government to urgently restore the powers of the ANI, by swiftly
adopting a credible ANI law, as they have indicated that they
intend to.
"The publication of the report has had a clear
impact in Romania, and could be a catalyst for quick and substantive
progress. President Basescu has called for a special parliamentary
session in August to try and adopt a credible ANI law, the "Small
Reforms Law" and a law preventing the suspension of cases
when lawyers appeal to the Constitutional Court on matters of
law."
65.19 Noting that this is now the fourth set of full
reports issued under the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism
since Romania's and Bulgaria's accession, the Minister says:
"The Government urges both countries to refocus
their efforts to ensure they deliver concrete progress against
the recommendations made by the Commission, as well as the Commission's
outstanding recommendations from 2009. Other Member States are
starting to link the CVM with Bulgaria and Romania's desire to
join the Schengen zone. Although the UK is not in Schengen, we
recognise that fulfilling the benchmark criteria would have obvious
wider benefits for both countries, including greater confidence
in their border management. We continue to strongly support the
CVM and remain resolute that it should remain in place until all
benchmark criteria are met."
65.20 The Minister concludes by noting that further
assistance will be provided using existing European Community
funding under the programmes already available to Bulgaria and
Romania, and explaining that:
"Romania also has access to €100m World
Bank loan to upgrade its judicial infrastructure (building new
court rooms etc). We will continue to support Romania on justice
reform and anti-corruption through our modest bilateral programme
at the British Embassy in Bucharest. Recently financed projects
include funding two retired judges to help the Ministry of Justice
draft sentencing guidelines, and co-funding with the Dutch a survey
to address corruption in the Health Sector."
The Minister's letter of 20 June 2010
65.21 As the previous Committee noted on a number
of previous occasions, its concern is not with a post-mortem on
Bulgaria and Romania's accession but, rather, to ensure that the
lessons that emerge from it are incorporated into the way in which
subsequent accessions are handled, and specifically that of Croatia.
65.22 In its Report on the similar Commission reports
of 2009, the previous Committee recalled not only its own visit
to Croatia in June 2009 but also the evidence it took from the
then Foreign Secretary (David Miliband) on 2 July 2009 on enlargement,
with a particular focus on the lessons to be learned, and especially
the Commission's earlier judgement that both Bulgaria and Romania
needed to demonstrate three things:
— "an
autonomously functioning, stable judiciary, which is able to detect
and sanction conflicts of interests, corruption and organised
crime and preserve the rule of law";
— "concrete
cases of indictments, trials and convictions regarding high-level
corruption and organised crime"; and that
— "the
legal system is capable of implementing the laws in an independent
and efficient way."
On that occasion, the previous Committee asked him
if he agreed that Croatia needed to meet all of these requirements
before it is allowed to accede to the European Union.
65.23 The then Foreign Secretary's response is set
out in that Report, together with a further letter of 25 July
2009 from him, in which he outlined in greater detail the strengthening
of the accession process via the addition of a new Chapter 23
on judicial reform and fundamental rights, within which Member
States would have to agree unanimously on opening and closing
benchmarks, and that they had been met, before the chapter could
be opened or closed. There, he noted that the Council had not
yet set closing benchmarks and that "when the moment comes
we and the EU will certainly want to ensure that they set clear
requirements for tackling corruption, including a track record
of results".[288]
65.24 Prior to the publication of these Reports and
receipt of his Explanatory Memorandum, the Committee received
a letter of 20 June 2010 from the Minister for Europe with an
overview of progress. He notes that Croatia has now opened 30
chapters out of 35, and that 18 have been provisionally closed.
He goes on to say that the Government has now managed to secure
agreement on an EU negotiating position that includes "setting
rigorous benchmarks in the areas we want" — including
on cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for (former)
Yugoslavia (ICTY) — and proposes to agree to open formal
negotiations with Croatia on this basis. Before the chapter can
close, a "comprehensive and robust set of benchmarks"
will need to be met (31 in all, compared with the 3-6 that most
other chapters have), covering a range of important issues including:
judicial transparency, impartiality and efficiency; tackling corruption;
protecting minority rights; resolving outstanding refugee return
issues; and protection of human rights.
65.25 The Government has, the Minister says, also
secured: clarification that Croatia will need to show a track
record of implementation across these areas; and a closing
benchmark on cooperation with ICTY:
"Full cooperation with the ICTY remains a
requirement for Croatia's progress throughout the accession process,
including for the provisional closure of this chapter, in line
with the negotiating framework adopted by the Council on 3 October
2005."[the Minister's emphasis and italics.]
65.26 The Minister then says that:
"The Government assesses that Croatia has continued
to demonstrate commitment to progress the investigation in missing
documents requested by the Chief Prosecutor for the trial of General
Gotovina. Since December Prime Minister Kosor has chaired 3 inter-agency
meetings to drive forward an investigation by a new Task Force.
The Task Force is constrained by an order from the Tribunal which
prevents them from accessing documents seized from the Gotovina
Defence team in December. Despite this the Task Force has conducted
approximately 40 interviews with new individuals and fresh searches
of premises. Chief Prosecutor Brammertz briefed the Foreign Affairs
Council on 14 June and expressed his increasing confidence in
the Task Force. This is reflected in his latest report to the
UNSC on 18 June."
"On the basis of the agreement of a clear benchmark
and this assessment of Croatian cooperation Ministers have agreed
in principle to open this chapter when technical negotiations
are concluded, probably on Wednesday 23 June. I spoke yesterday
to Davor Bozinovic, State Secretary of the Croatian Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, to advise him of this and impress on him the
need for Croatia to continue to progress the investigation and
demonstrate its commitment to full cooperation with the ICTY."
65.27 The Minister goes on to say that the Commission
will monitor Croatia's progress on this chapter closely, and that
he would be happy to provide updates on progress. He also encloses
an extract from ICTY Chief Prosecutor Brammertz's Oral Report
of 10 June 2010 to the UN Security Council.
Conclusion
65.28 The Commission reports, which we now clear,
and the Minister's comments speak for themselves. Concerning the
wider lessons of the experience with Bulgaria and Romania's accession,
the Committee shares its predecessor's standpoint.
65.29 The Committee is thus reassured by what
the Minister has to say in his letter, though it notes his emphasis
on the word "full" in the paragraph cited concerning
the closing benchmark on cooperation with ICTY. This could plainly
be open to a number of interpretations, and be influenced by political
considerations. We should accordingly be grateful if, when he
provides the next update, the Minister would expand on this, and
say, in judging what constitutes "full" cooperation,
to what extent the Council will depend upon the assessment in
this regard of the ICTY Chief Prosecutor.
284 For details, see previous Reports enumerated in
the headnote to this chapter. Back
285
Commission Decision 2006/929/EC of 13 December 2006 establishing
a mechanism for cooperation and verification of progress in Bulgaria
and Romania to address specific benchmarks in the areas of judicial
reform and the fight against corruption and organised crime (OJ
L 354, 14.12.2006, p. 56 and 58; see http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:354:0056:0057:EN:PDF
and http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:354:0058:0060:EN:PDF). Back
286
Stg Co Deb, European Standing
Committee, 15 January 2007, cols. 3-28. Back
287
See HC 5-xviii (2009-10), chapter 7 (7 April 2010). Back
288
See headnote: (30828) and (30829); 12386/09 and 12388/09: HC 19-xxvi
(2008-09), chapter 22 (10 September 2010). Back
| 
