加入欧盟对法治条件的挑战

IF 0.2 Q4 LAW
Ana Knežević Bojović, V. Ćorić
{"title":"加入欧盟对法治条件的挑战","authors":"Ana Knežević Bojović, V. Ćorić","doi":"10.46282/blr.2023.7.1.327","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"EU enlargement process towards the Western Balkan countries has been in place since the 2003 Thessaloniki summit. However, the expected democratic transformation and fostering of the rule of law values have not become a reality, while rule of law conditionality has been criticized as ineffective in achieving its goals. In parallel, the EU has been struggling with rule of law backsliding internally, and, in order to tackle this issue, has developed a multitude of instruments that have so far had limited effects on internal rule of law promotion. The paper supports the idea that there is a need for approximation of the rule of law standards in the EU’s internal and accession policies. After providing a bird’s-eye-view of the position of the rule of law in EU accession negotiations with WB countries, the authors go on to elaborate on the four major causes contributing to the EU’s lack of effectiveness and coherence in the WB accession process. In doing so, the authors provide recommendations on how to improve the convergence between internal and accession rule of law policies and foster a common understanding of the rule of law as a core pre-and post-accession value in the EU.","PeriodicalId":33796,"journal":{"name":"Bratislava Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Challenges of Rule of Law Conditionality in EU Accession\",\"authors\":\"Ana Knežević Bojović, V. Ćorić\",\"doi\":\"10.46282/blr.2023.7.1.327\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"EU enlargement process towards the Western Balkan countries has been in place since the 2003 Thessaloniki summit. However, the expected democratic transformation and fostering of the rule of law values have not become a reality, while rule of law conditionality has been criticized as ineffective in achieving its goals. In parallel, the EU has been struggling with rule of law backsliding internally, and, in order to tackle this issue, has developed a multitude of instruments that have so far had limited effects on internal rule of law promotion. The paper supports the idea that there is a need for approximation of the rule of law standards in the EU’s internal and accession policies. After providing a bird’s-eye-view of the position of the rule of law in EU accession negotiations with WB countries, the authors go on to elaborate on the four major causes contributing to the EU’s lack of effectiveness and coherence in the WB accession process. In doing so, the authors provide recommendations on how to improve the convergence between internal and accession rule of law policies and foster a common understanding of the rule of law as a core pre-and post-accession value in the EU.\",\"PeriodicalId\":33796,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bratislava Law Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bratislava Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.46282/blr.2023.7.1.327\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bratislava Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46282/blr.2023.7.1.327","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

自2003年塞萨洛尼基峰会以来,欧盟向西巴尔干国家的扩大进程一直在进行。然而,预期的民主转型和法治价值观的培养并没有成为现实,而法治条件被批评为无法实现其目标。与此同时,欧盟一直在与国内法治倒退作斗争,为了解决这一问题,欧盟制定了许多文书,迄今为止对促进国内法治的作用有限。该文件支持这样一种观点,即在欧盟的内部和加入政策中需要近似法治标准。在对法治在与世界银行国家加入欧盟谈判中的地位进行了鸟瞰之后,作者继续阐述了导致欧盟在加入世界银行过程中缺乏有效性和一致性的四个主要原因。在这样做的过程中,作者就如何改善内部法治政策与加入欧盟法治政策之间的一致性,并促进对法治作为欧盟加入前后核心价值观的共同理解提出了建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Challenges of Rule of Law Conditionality in EU Accession
EU enlargement process towards the Western Balkan countries has been in place since the 2003 Thessaloniki summit. However, the expected democratic transformation and fostering of the rule of law values have not become a reality, while rule of law conditionality has been criticized as ineffective in achieving its goals. In parallel, the EU has been struggling with rule of law backsliding internally, and, in order to tackle this issue, has developed a multitude of instruments that have so far had limited effects on internal rule of law promotion. The paper supports the idea that there is a need for approximation of the rule of law standards in the EU’s internal and accession policies. After providing a bird’s-eye-view of the position of the rule of law in EU accession negotiations with WB countries, the authors go on to elaborate on the four major causes contributing to the EU’s lack of effectiveness and coherence in the WB accession process. In doing so, the authors provide recommendations on how to improve the convergence between internal and accession rule of law policies and foster a common understanding of the rule of law as a core pre-and post-accession value in the EU.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信