Flash News
SPAK seizes the assets of two partners of Evis Berber
Goro in prison, Blerina Balaj is appointed mayor of Himara Municipality
Tensions at the Himara City Council meeting, citizens demand the removal of Klos and Tavo
Olsi, just like Edi, is a man...
Under investigation for drug trafficking, SPAK seizes the assets of Princ Dobroshi and Olsi Syzi
They err, but also correct; European auditors' report as an apology for 'internationals'
Genc Pollo
Last week, the 55-page report of the Luxembourg-based European Court of Auditors on the effectiveness of the EU enlargement policy in the Western Balkans during 2014-2020. This body, which in our country corresponds to the Supreme State Audit, concluded that the EU impact on judicial reform and the consolidation of the rule of law had been minimal. This is mainly because the political will of the Balkan governments is lacking. The latter we must keep in mind because, by the principle of individual and collective responsibility, we must not lament for the foreigners, the Brussels officials in this case, for the problems we open to ourselves. But the report also concludes that the European Commission's tools and methods had been unsuccessful; this was because Brussels had not implemented the conditionality (it had continued funding even when the institutions in the Balkans did not want to meet the set conditions), the results of the projects were not rigorously verified, official data were taken for granted, independent actors were not sufficiently consulted and civil society (with some positive exceptions) and the like. Problems were encountered both in the countries that had not opened membership negotiations (Albania, Northern Macedonia, Kosovo, Bosnia, and Herzegovina) and in those that had been negotiating for a decade (Montenegro, Serbia). In Albania, the report finds, for example, that justice reform is going well (according to the European Commission), but the public is losing faith in it and that the problems caused are acute according to independent observers (pp. 39-40).
European auditors thus confirm that the criticisms of these years in Tirana, Belgrade, and elsewhere in the region for "sugary reports of the European Commission" were not unfounded; In the case of Albania, the conclusions from Luxembourg give the right to those member states that set specific conditions as well as to the MEPs who realistically insisted that some conditions were not met. As above, I wish to encourage reflections on the core/facade ratio to those who roared about the opening of negotiations, on the usefulness and impact of this process, and its review.
The purpose of this note is not to fully explain the Court of Accounts report. This requires a more detailed analysis.
This public report of an important institution of the European Union with its critical content will be discussed in the Commission of the European Parliament as well as between the member states (let us hope that this process will improve the enlargement policies and above all their positive impact to the rule of law in our lands).
But beyond our topic this example shows that in an open and democratic political system problems can not be hidden for long, mistakes are sooner or later discovered and through an institutional process, correction is possible.
Let us take two examples from the US: The failure in Afghanistan after 20 years of military presence should not come as a surprise. Whoever had read the reports of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan (SIGAR) mandated by Congress, would have realized in time that things were going wrong and would end even worse. Billions of dollars given without criteria would greatly inflate the Afghan government's corruption, discredit it, and increase support for the ascetic Taliban. How this ended is already history. But the open democracy of the checks and balances system allows you to recognize the problems and try to solve them. But error through omissions or even unwanted actions is not ruled out.
In previous notes, I have reprimanded Sajmir Tahiri's public defense by the US ambassador at the height of the mega-cannabis operation in 2016, Tahiri's admission to the White House as a member of a government delegation led by Rama in April of this year, and his attack the ambassador to the judiciary when, finally, in autumn 2017, they dared to initiate criminal proceedings against the former minister. What should be added here is that in all the hearings of the trial Tahiri was present as an official of the American embassy. This is a well-known sign of interest in a justice that is not given to bandits. Following the former minister's mild sentence, the embassy expressed disappointment through a press release. Even in this case, although we do not have public reports that prompted the repositioning of American diplomacy, we see that the correction of the error occurred.
In the circumstances of the spread of populism and bigotry of all kinds in those few free societies on the globe, but also of the strengthening of the autocratic model starting with China and Russia, it is appropriate to recall the advantages, or rather the superiority, of liberal democracy. The above examples concretely prove that freedom of thought and expression, separation of powers and institutional independence, all the central elements of liberal democracy, enable the identification of problems and mistakes, open debate on them, and open official ways of correction and recalibration.
It is therefore right to see these examples as an apology for liberal democracy. Not forgetting that we must protect her first in our homeland where she is in acute danger.
* Former Minister and MP
** The title is of Politiko.al