Special Report EU support for the rule of law in the Western Balkans:
despite efforts, fundamental problems persist
Conclusions and recommendations
71 The main conclusion of this audit of the effectiveness of EU support for the rule
of law in the Western Balkans is that, EU action has contributed to reforms in technical
areas, such as the efficiency of the judiciary and the development of relevant
legislation, but in a context of insufficient political will, it has had a limited overall
impact in advancing fundamental rule of law reforms in the region.
72 Notwithstanding some positive recent developments, mainly in Albania and
North Macedonia, the Commission and other international organisations report
limited progress in the rule of law. Fundamental problems remain in areas such as the
independence of the judiciary, the concentration of power, political interference and
corruption, which call for additional efforts in promoting reforms in these areas (see
paragraphs 57-58 and 68).
Recommendation 1 – Strengthen the mechanism for promoting rule of law reforms in the enlargement process
The Commission should strengthen its approach to encouraging and supporting
fundamental reforms in the enlargement process. In particular, it should concentrate
on setting strategic targets for each enlargement country by establishing final impact
indicators in fundamental areas of the rule of law, such as independence of the
judiciary, freedom of expression, the fight against corruption and state capture
together with milestones for monitoring progress towards them.
Timeframe: December 2022
73 We found that, through the ‘fundamentals first’ approach and, since 2020, the
clustering of negotiation chapters, the Commission has increased its focus on the rule
of law in the Western Balkans and has generally translated the EU’s political priorities
for the rule of law into specific action under the instrument for pre-accession (IPA) (see
paragraphs 25-27).
74 Other international organisations, think tanks and civil society organisations
(CSO) have identified the same focus areas as the Commission for rule of law. We
found, however, that EU support for civil society action on the rule of law is insufficient
in meeting the needs of the sector and its impact is not thoroughly monitored. For
example, the Commission has dropped the IPA II indicator for monitoring civil society
participation in the reform process and therefore does not report progress in this area
(see paragraphs 28-31).
75 An enabling media and civil society environment can help publicise and clarify the
goals and results of EU actions, explain the path to EU membership and promote the
EU’s democratic principles. We found that freedom of expression is the area that has
progressed the least in all six countries. In some countries, public support for the
reforms necessary for accession is declining (see paragraphs 68-70).
Recommendation 2 – Intensify support for civil society engaged in rule of law reforms and media independence
The Commission and the European External Action Service should intensify their
support for independent civil society organisations and independent journalists. In
particular, they should:
(a) prioritise support for an independent media and for CSOs active in the area of
rule of law by earmarking IPA III funding for CSOs under rule of law actions;
(b) provide for long-term financial support for CSOs and independent media
organisations, in a way that is not exclusively based on project funding;
(c) assist civil society and independent media organisations to enable them to
develop tailor-made tools to monitor how corruption evolves;
(d) monitor the contribution of CSOs to rule of law reforms by means of specific
indicators.
Timeframe: December 2022
76 Although the Commission has recognised that administrative capacity and
political will are the key risk areas in the implementation of IPA projects, we found no
specific actions to mitigate those risks. In particular, key risks are not used to generate
preconditions for project funding or implementation, so they do not serve for the
design of concrete mitigation measures. EU delegations have also rarely exploited the
possibility of suspending IPA financial support if reforms are not progressing
satisfactorily. IPA II lacks suitably strict conditionality clauses that would directly link
stalled rule of law reforms to consequences in the funding of other sectors. The
Commission’s legislative proposal for the IPA III regulation reinforces conditionality.
Yet the draft did not set out clearly how conditionality will affect the provision of
funding (see paragraphs 34-35 and 38-41).
77 We also found that, whenever the Council has applied political conditionality in
the form of the overall balance clause, this has induced the partner countries to
advance their reform agendas. Differences have arisen between the Commission and
the Council on the extent to which a partner country has satisfied the clause. In our
view, this situation threatens the incentive effects of conditionality (see paragraphs 41-45).
Recommendation 3 – Reinforce the use of conditionality in
IPA III
The Commission should link the disbursement of IPA III funding in non-rule of law
areas (for example, rural development and infrastructure) to progress on the rule of
law.
Timeframe: December 2022
78 The rule of law covers several interconnected cross-cutting areas. The 2020
enlargement methodology is a step in the right direction, because it entails the
clustering of negotiation chapters, thereby enabling the Commission to tackle all areas
related to the rule of law simultaneously during accession negotiations. However, the
new methodology is too recent to have produced visible results, and it applies to
negotiating countries only. The cross-cutting nature of rule of law means that EU
actions funded in other IPA sectors may be negatively affected by generalised rule of
law deficiencies (see paragraph 65).
79 Most completed projects have achieved their intended outputs, and around half
have achieved their intended outcomes. In the case of ongoing projects, either it is too
early to make an assessment owing to project extensions, or progress cannot be
measured because performance information is missing or of insufficient quality. When
carried out, results oriented monitoring has helped to highlight projects results and
improving their implementation. Overall, we found that IPA assistance has helped
improve the efficiency of the judiciary and was key to implementing the legislative
framework and promoting a proactive approach in the fight against corruption (see
paragraphs 47-51).
80 The main obstacles to project sustainability are poor financial and institutional
capacity and lack of political will. Few IPA projects are taken up by national authorities,
and they may thus not be financially sustainable after the end of EU support.
Furthermore, the modest progress made in the rule of law over the last 20 years
threatens the overall sustainability of EU support, since it raises questions about the
credibility of the accession process. Reporting on lessons learnt can help identify
performance issues and obstacles to the sustainability of results, but is not commonly
a part of project design (see paragraphs 52-56).
Recommendation 4 – Strengthen project reporting and monitoring
The Commission should:
(a) construct sound log-frames for all relevant IPA-funded projects including , among
other things, clearly defined output and outcome indicators using baseline and
target values;
(b) increase the use of results oriented monitoring missions of IPA III funded projects
in the rule of law sector;
(c) include a ‘lessons learnt’ section in all final project reporting, with findings and
recommendations to improve the sustainability of future project results.
Timeframe: December 2022
This Report was adopted by Chamber III, headed by Mrs Bettina Jakobsen, Member of
the Court of Auditors, in Luxembourg on 9 November 2021.
For the Court of Auditors
Klaus-Heiner Lehne
President
No comments:
Post a Comment