Presentation on theme: "Case of Serbia: Relations between EU integration process and judiciry reform Dušan Brajković Between Transformation and Integration – South-East Europe’s."— Presentation transcript:
Case of Serbia: Relations between EU integration process and judiciry reform Dušan Brajković Between Transformation and Integration – South-East Europe’s journey into the European Union
Current situation in the Republic of Serbia in view of the EU-accession process Membership in European Union is key strategic objective Current Status: Candidate for membership in EU Ongoing EU membership negotiation process is structured around 35 different negotiation chapters Special focus on Chapter 23 (Judiciary and fundamental rights) and Chapter 24 (Justice, freedom and security) Action plan for fulfillment of recommendations for chapters 23 and 24
Key reform challenges in the field of rule of law Necessity to continue with reforms in following areas: judiciary reform, fight against corruption, protection of human and minority rights Judiciary reform stands out with its importance and intensity. Resolving case backlog
Key achievements towards transformation and integration National Judicial Reform Strategy (adopted July 2013) sets out reform priorities until 2018 in five reform areas: independence, impartiality and quality of justice, accountability, competence and efficiency Arranging legislative framework - number of necessary regulations adopted Institutional capacities of judicial bodies improved Establishment of Judicial Academy
EU integration process as an accelerator of transformation Allows better conceptualization and structuring of reforms Provides functional mechanisms for monitoring of reforms Provides additional resources and professional support for successful realization of reforms
EU integration process as an impediment to reforms Overtaking of solutions which were not fully in line with existing general legal system of the Republic of Serbia Certain expectations which accrue in EU integration process are very demanding and understand even changes in constitutional framework Expected changes in constitutional framework
Support of international organizations / development partners EU (through instrument for pre-accession assistance); bilateral donations of different EU member or other states (German Development Cooperation, Norway, Great Britain, Netherlands etc.); USAID; Council of Europe; OSCE; UN agencies; World Bank, etc. Most common instrument of support: development projects which are related to provision of technical assistance, procurement of technical equipment, execution of infrastructure works, etc. In period from 2007 in area of Rule of Law more than 100 different projects were realized valuing more than 180 million euro (approx. 230 million dollars).
Support of international organizations / development partners Direct award to relevant and competent international development organizations showed as a good modality for implementation of development projects: It allows higher level of flexibility in adressing needs, It allows continuity in provision of support, It allows long term utilization of various networks on national or international level.
Lessons learned around rule of law reforms and EU integration process Necessity of careful planning of reforms in order to achieve proper compromise between quality and speed International organizations and development partners need to allow flexibility in support in order to provide better addressing of real priorities and needs which derive from reforms
Next steps In forthcoming period negotiation process for membership in EU will significantly intensify In area of judicial reform and in the context of negotiation process, special attention will be given to: rounding up of legislative framework and its consistent application in the context of negotiations process improvement of judicial efficiency strengthening of institutional capacities within the judicial sector and improvement of coordination among judicial bodies improvement of ICT application in work of judicial bodies