This shadow report brings together in a single coherent whole all the findings, conclusions and recommendations that have emerged from the monitoring of the areas contained in Chapter 23 – Judiciary and Fundamental Rights. This is the sixth such report published by the European Policy Institute – Skopje (EPI), taking into account the comments and opinions of NGOs. The previous four reports covered the following periods: October 2014 – July 2015, July 2015 – April 2016, May 2016 – January 2018 and June 2018 – March 2019, April 2019 – March 2020.

The report covers the period from the beginning of April 2020 until the end of September 2021. The report presents data that are relevant before April 2019, if they were needed for contextualization or clarification of the novelties of the current reporting period, and which are relevant for the reporting period. The reporting period corresponds to the reporting period of the European Commission (EC) for the Republic of North Macedonia (RNM, North Macedonia).

This report follows the structure of Chapter 23, in line with the EC report. At the end of each area, we have singled out in a frame the recommendations and the main conclusions.

During the reporting period, the country faced a veto from Bulgaria, opposing the draft negotiating framework with North Macedonia and no compromise was reached on opening the first intergovernmental conference. Due to the COVID 19 pandemic a state of emergency was declared and the early parliamentary elections were postponed. This put to the test the institutions that in this extremely dynamic period had to deal with the crisis caused by the pandemic, and put the health of citizens foreground, and at the same time continue with other reforms.

This shadow report was prepared as part of an institutional grant from the European Policy Institute funded under the CIVICA Mobilitas Program.

Analysis of the Report of the European Commission for the Republic of North Macedonia from October 19, 2021

The publication of the Enlargement Package this year took place in the circumstances of continued focus on the COVID-19 crisis, highly pronounced geopolitical and geostrategic factors, evolving energy crisis, as well as re-emerging migration issues. Rifts over rule of law standards have been deepening in the EU, following a series of actions by the European Commission (EC) and judgments of the EU Court of Justice (CJEU) against Poland and Hungary, noted in the EU annual Rule of Law Report.1 Such trends in the EU have a serious impact on support for enlargement even in countries that have traditionally promoted this policy.

In this year’s Enlargement Strategy the Commission once again recommends the start of negotiations – to adopt the negotiating framework and to hold the first intergovernmental conferences with North Macedonia and Albania by the end of the year, arguing that the delay has a negative impact on EU’s credibility. Visa liberalization for Kosovo is also recommended again. The Commission proposed opening of two clusters with Serbia. No further steps have been proposed for other countries. The Commission is trying to take a move forward this year, after last year’s stagnation, when no country made any progress. The rather ambitious statements by the President of the EC, Von der Leyen, during her September visit to the region before the announcement of the Package, created a pretext for these developments. Less ambitious was the attempt of the Member States to maintain the momentum of the process at the EU-Western Balkans Summit held in Brdo, Slovenia. This Report comes at a time when the accession process of North Macedonia is “captured” by the blockade imposed by Bulgaria, which completely overshadows the conditions and reforms arising from the obligations of membership, i.e. the adoption of the EU acquis.

In these circumstances, the risk of further weakening of the EU’s transformational power of the accession is extremely high. This risk is especially high in our country, which has been in the SAA process for two decades, but is also present throughout the region. In addition, the previously widespread opinion that the European Union acts as an actor that contributes to democratization in the candidate countries is questioned.

The presentation by Commissioner Várhelyi of the Enlargement Package at the Foreign Policy Commission was evidently overshadowed by the blocked accession path of North Macedonia and Albania and the inability of EU Member States to adopt a decision on the start of accession negotiations with these two countries.

In such a setting, the Commission has taken the safe path of remaining behind its already known main findings and recommendations regarding the opening of accession negotiations. In its conclusions in this year’s Enlargement Strategy, the Commission reiterates that the delays in the official launch of accession negotiations with Albania and North Macedonia are having a negative impact on the credibility of the EU. Hence, the Commission calls for pending bilateral issues between Bulgaria and North Macedonia to be resolved as a matter of priority, while underlining that it is crucial that the EU Member States conclude the discussions on the Negotiating Frameworks without further delay and that the first intergovernmental conferences with Albania and North Macedonia are held as soon as possible and before the end of this year. This persistence in the recommendations is supported by the assessment that the country continues to meet the conditions for holding the first intergovernmental conference considering that it “has maintained a steady and determined pace in implementing EU reforms, particularly in key areas such as the rule of law, including in the fight against corruption and organised crime.”

Despite the fact that the Report has been methodologically amended, having now fully cluster-based structure, in essence, there are no major novelties in the approach of the Commission, except for the sequence of order of chapters and the summing up of the main findings per chapter. Under most of the clusters, it has been assessed that North Macedonia is moderately prepared to assume the obligations of EU membership, with evident differences under specific chapters covered by various clusters.

Before the October 2019 EU Council meeting, the Bulgarian Government adopted a Framework position, confirmed with a Declaration by its Assembly. Though supportive of the opening of the accession negotiations, the position places new conditions on the Republic of North Macedonia, claiming that they derive from the 2017 Treaty on Friendship, Good Neighbourly Relations and Cooperation Between the Republic of Macedonia and the Republic of Bulgaria.

This document was followed by a Statement of the Bulgarian Government annexed to the Council conclusions of March 2020.

The European Policy Institute – Skopje published a policy brief analysing the Bulgarian conditions, compared to the bilateral Treaty. Furthermore, the Brief explores their possible impact, as well as the options for addressing the new challenges they pose for the EU accession of North Macedonia, focusing on the forthcoming negotiating framework, in view of the new enlargement methodology.

This shadow report brings together in a single coherent whole all the findings, conclusions and recommendations that have emerged from the monitoring of the areas contained in Chapter 23 – Judiciary and Fundamental Rights. This is the sixth such report published by the European Policy Institute – Skopje (EPI), taking into account the comments and opinions of NGOs. The previous four reports covered the following periods: October 2014 – July 2015, July 2015 – April 2016, May 2016 – January 2018 and June 2018 – March 2019, April 2019 – March 2020.

The report covers the period from the beginning of April 2020 until the end of September 2021. The report presents data that are relevant before April 2019, if they were needed for contextualization or clarification of the novelties of the current reporting period, and which are relevant for the reporting period. The reporting period corresponds to the reporting period of the European Commission (EC) for the Republic of North Macedonia (RNM, North Macedonia).

This report follows the structure of Chapter 23, in line with the EC report. At the end of each area, we have singled out in a frame the recommendations and the main conclusions.

During the reporting period, the country faced a veto from Bulgaria, opposing the draft negotiating framework with North Macedonia and no compromise was reached on opening the first intergovernmental conference. Due to the COVID 19 pandemic a state of emergency was declared and the early parliamentary elections were postponed. This put to the test the institutions that in this extremely dynamic period had to deal with the crisis caused by the pandemic, and put the health of citizens foreground, and at the same time continue with other reforms.

This shadow report was prepared as part of an institutional grant from the European Policy Institute funded under the CIVICA Mobilitas Program.

Analysis of the Report of the European Commission for the Republic of North Macedonia from October 19, 2021

The publication of the Enlargement Package this year took place in the circumstances of continued focus on the COVID-19 crisis, highly pronounced geopolitical and geostrategic factors, evolving energy crisis, as well as re-emerging migration issues. Rifts over rule of law standards have been deepening in the EU, following a series of actions by the European Commission (EC) and judgments of the EU Court of Justice (CJEU) against Poland and Hungary, noted in the EU annual Rule of Law Report.1 Such trends in the EU have a serious impact on support for enlargement even in countries that have traditionally promoted this policy.

In this year’s Enlargement Strategy the Commission once again recommends the start of negotiations – to adopt the negotiating framework and to hold the first intergovernmental conferences with North Macedonia and Albania by the end of the year, arguing that the delay has a negative impact on EU’s credibility. Visa liberalization for Kosovo is also recommended again. The Commission proposed opening of two clusters with Serbia. No further steps have been proposed for other countries. The Commission is trying to take a move forward this year, after last year’s stagnation, when no country made any progress. The rather ambitious statements by the President of the EC, Von der Leyen, during her September visit to the region before the announcement of the Package, created a pretext for these developments. Less ambitious was the attempt of the Member States to maintain the momentum of the process at the EU-Western Balkans Summit held in Brdo, Slovenia. This Report comes at a time when the accession process of North Macedonia is “captured” by the blockade imposed by Bulgaria, which completely overshadows the conditions and reforms arising from the obligations of membership, i.e. the adoption of the EU acquis.

In these circumstances, the risk of further weakening of the EU’s transformational power of the accession is extremely high. This risk is especially high in our country, which has been in the SAA process for two decades, but is also present throughout the region. In addition, the previously widespread opinion that the European Union acts as an actor that contributes to democratization in the candidate countries is questioned.

The presentation by Commissioner Várhelyi of the Enlargement Package at the Foreign Policy Commission was evidently overshadowed by the blocked accession path of North Macedonia and Albania and the inability of EU Member States to adopt a decision on the start of accession negotiations with these two countries.

In such a setting, the Commission has taken the safe path of remaining behind its already known main findings and recommendations regarding the opening of accession negotiations. In its conclusions in this year’s Enlargement Strategy, the Commission reiterates that the delays in the official launch of accession negotiations with Albania and North Macedonia are having a negative impact on the credibility of the EU. Hence, the Commission calls for pending bilateral issues between Bulgaria and North Macedonia to be resolved as a matter of priority, while underlining that it is crucial that the EU Member States conclude the discussions on the Negotiating Frameworks without further delay and that the first intergovernmental conferences with Albania and North Macedonia are held as soon as possible and before the end of this year. This persistence in the recommendations is supported by the assessment that the country continues to meet the conditions for holding the first intergovernmental conference considering that it “has maintained a steady and determined pace in implementing EU reforms, particularly in key areas such as the rule of law, including in the fight against corruption and organised crime.”

Despite the fact that the Report has been methodologically amended, having now fully cluster-based structure, in essence, there are no major novelties in the approach of the Commission, except for the sequence of order of chapters and the summing up of the main findings per chapter. Under most of the clusters, it has been assessed that North Macedonia is moderately prepared to assume the obligations of EU membership, with evident differences under specific chapters covered by various clusters.

Before the October 2019 EU Council meeting, the Bulgarian Government adopted a Framework position, confirmed with a Declaration by its Assembly. Though supportive of the opening of the accession negotiations, the position places new conditions on the Republic of North Macedonia, claiming that they derive from the 2017 Treaty on Friendship, Good Neighbourly Relations and Cooperation Between the Republic of Macedonia and the Republic of Bulgaria.

This document was followed by a Statement of the Bulgarian Government annexed to the Council conclusions of March 2020.

The European Policy Institute – Skopje published a policy brief analysing the Bulgarian conditions, compared to the bilateral Treaty. Furthermore, the Brief explores their possible impact, as well as the options for addressing the new challenges they pose for the EU accession of North Macedonia, focusing on the forthcoming negotiating framework, in view of the new enlargement methodology.