1. EU is planning a new approach for BiH, on what should it be based?
Indeed foreign ministers are considering Bosnia and Herzegovina issues at the moment. It is important to note that as HR/VP Ashton said it is about how we can help BiH get over the bar – not about lowering it. We shall see how discussions progress.
That said, the European Union is already working over a very wide range of issues in BiH. The Commission will assist BiH along with the other countries in the region to produce a national economic reform programme and a competitiveness and growth programme. As recent protests have shown, key economic issues have to be addressed, primarily by the BiH politicians.
Also we intend to expand the Structured dialogue on justice to cover further rule of law issues in addition to the justice system.
Although there is much talk of new approaches, the EU’s central policy objective stays the same – we want a united, sovereign BiH to join the EU on its own merits and we are here, fully committed to help with that.
2. Is BiH far away from implementing the SAA, since a lot of EU officials marked BiH as a country which stands behind the regional countries when it comes to the progress towards the EU, which are the priorities for BiH in this sense?
BiH is in a minority in not having the SAA fully in force. The Agreement needs to be in force so that BiH can make further progress towards the EU.
But it is not far away. The SAA could be put into force by the Member States once discrimination is removed from the BiH Constitution and the Election Law for the State-level Presidency and State-level House of Peoples. That means implementing the Sejdic-Finci judgement – this well known issue will not go away.
Another clear priority is establishing an effective EU co-ordination mechanism to enable the country to present one position to the EU on relevant issues. So much for the technicalities. The real priority of course is delivering that next step on the EU path for the benefit of citizens who overwhelmingly believe that getting closer will improve the economy, attract investment and create jobs. We agree.
3. Some time ago a seminar was being held on defining the priorities for making a structural dialogue on the justice reform, why is that necessary when most of the recommendations of the EC have not been fulfilled?
The seminar organised on 7 March in Sarajevo was gathered by the EU as a priority setting exercise on other rule of law matters, complementing the justice issues already addressed by the ongoing Structured Dialogue. The discussion on that occasion benefited also a lot from the presence of Civil society organizations, which the EU will continue to increasingly involve.
You mention that there are several outstanding recommendations from previous Dialogue plenaries that still require due developments on the parts of BiH authorities. That is correct. And the EU continues to thoroughly monitor those areas and also, when relevant, assist competent authorities in their respective endeavours. But this cannot be a reason to keep on hold the joint identification of new priorities, for the following reasons.
The Structured Dialogue on Justice has delivered already a lot. Some developments are more visible than others but, overall, quite a few boxes have been ticked. For instance, the referral of war crimes cases from the State-level judiciary to other instances throughout BiH is now been carried out based on objective and operational parameters. In support to the delicate endeavour of clearing the war crime backlog, the EU allocated around 15€ million of extraordinary direct budget support, which started to be channelled to all competent instances after the referral of cases started, primarily to the Entities judiciary.
Regional cooperation was strengthened thanks to the signing of cooperation protocols between the BiH Prosecutor and his counterparts in Serbia and Croatia. The application of different criminal codes in war crimes proceedings was also consistently addressed. The Reform of the state level judiciary advanced, also thanks to the contribution of the Venice Commission, and now reached the BiH Council of Ministers.
Other deliverables are related to the consolidation of technical measures to enhance professionalism throughout the sector, as well as to measures addressing the reduction of the backlog of cases, particularly looking at the oldest cases and the unpaid utility bills ones.
If there are lots of outstanding issues still, that is because when it comes to institutional developments linked to complex pieces of legislation it is not realistic, nor advisable, to push for quick fixes. Plus, the EU monitors, engages, assists, supports, but never substitutes itself to domestic authorities, in a word, ownership remains the most important feature of this platform.
As a consequence, following almost three years of Dialogue, the EU was encouraged to broaden this platform to other matters relevant for the rule of law, starting with the fight against corruption, anti-discrimination policies, and some matters linked to the functioning of law enforcement agencies, like police/prosecutors cooperation. Yet, the functioning of the judiciary and the war crimes backlog will remain at the core and on the top of our engagements.
4. How do you see the process of fighting corruption in RS and how do you see in it in FBiH?
Corruption is a challenge that can be effectively tackled if all the components of the rule of law chain are in place. This means a solid legislation has to be in place, but also functioning institutions, from the law enforcement sectors to the judiciary and adequate coordination between them. The engine of effective anti-corruption policies remains nevertheless a strong political will to eradicate corruption practices from the society. Citizens throughout the country deserve the rule of law to be in place and not the rule of money, which is what corruption entails.
The importance of this issue is the same, across BiH and indeed the whole Western Balkan region. Many new initiatives have been launched at all levels in BiH, and it is high time to see their proper implementation.
Moreover, there is confidence that beyond political elites and institutions, all other relevant actors in the society continue to increasingly bring their contribution, even acting as driving force for cultural change. Professional communities and the civil sector must continue to mobilise and share responsibilities. They can do it only within a credible and durable process of consultations, identifying pressing needs. Because citizens rightfully await their responses since years, this is why an innovated approach to the dialogue is needed.
5. What do you think about the work of the judicial institutions in BiH, are they fulfilling the basic principles of efficiency, what is necessary to improve?
The judiciary throughout BiH is facing a lot of challenges. This is the system that had to face the highest war crimes cases backlog in history, to begin with. Plus, it should not be disregarded that a complex reform process was put forward only ten years ago, which deeply transformed the entire system that existed. Ten years is maybe a sufficient time to identify and begin addressing shortcomings, but it is however a short period to consolidate some practices and operating procedures that require consistent and constant fine tuning.
Yet, under the coordination of the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council, improved efficiency of the BiH judiciary is being effectively tackled through concrete reforms. The introduction for all judges and prosecutors of quotas of cases to be processed annually have permitted to reduce the case backlog in courts and prosecutors’ offices, in particular the backlog of the oldest cases. The introduction of written exams for candidates to enter the career is directly contributing to the improved quality of the recruitment by ensuring fairness and a recruitment based on merits and qualification rather than other unfair and non-objective factors. These are just examples as the reform process is still ongoing.
Next steps include tackling possible cases of conflict of interests within the sector by reinforcing internal rules and systematic control, a review of the activities of the Office of the Disciplinary Prosecutor to ensure that it has the means it needs to apply sanctions having a real deterring effect on corruption and mismanagement in the judiciary and, of course, continuing reducing the backlog of cases in all Courts throughout BiH, particularly unpaid utility bills cases that should be subject to out-of-court settlements. Recommendations by the European Commission are directly relevant in all these areas and the EU stands ready to continue its support to the HJPC and more broadly all BiH authorities in their effort to increase the efficiency of the sector and improve the image of the judiciary among BiH citizens.
6. What is your comment on the slow prosecution of war crimes committed against Serbs in BiH judicial institutions and how to improve their work?
In my previous answers I already highlighted key elements. The war crime processing has witnessed a positive turn with launching of the dialogue, and instruments such as regional protocols between prosecutors as well as increased number of domestic resources will help addressing bulk of the pending cases within the deadlines provided by the National Strategy for Processing the War Crimes Cases. The Supervisory Body for overseeing implementation of that Strategy must be fully supported in this work by all relevant institutions.
In addition to this backdrop, there is only one general consideration: all suspected criminals must be duly processed. Justice for all war crimes must be achieved, for the victims and their families, as well as to contribute to reconcile societies at the local level, across the country, as well as in the broader Western Balkans region.
