IN October 2005, the European Commission (EC) released a report on Bulgaria’s preparedness for EU accession.

Bulgaria was sharply criticised on five issues listed as “five red areas” by the report: company law; freedom to provide services; agriculture; regional policy; and justice and home affairs.

A second report on the steps taken by Bulgaria to meet these recommendations is scheduled to be released by the EC in May this year.

This report is expected to be a final test for Bulgaria’s will to meet EU criteria and the country’s readiness to join the EU on January 1 2007.

A clear message came from EU Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn who, on his last visit to Bulgaria in January, said: “The next months are crucial. We have to focus on practical assistance and reforms at all levels.”

The view of the NGO sector
On January 29, the Open Society Institute -Sofia (OSI) released its report on monitoring of the work of the state administration on the five areas identified as areas that “raise serious concern” in the EC October 2005 report.

European Integration Minster Meglena Kouneva welcomed the report and qualified it as “a job well done”. 

OSI experts concentrated on monitoring the measures planned by the Bulgarian Government in response to the EC report.

The experts’ opinion is that the measures are “quite adequate and cover a large part of the EC’s remarks”.

The OSI found that in two of the five “red areas” the Government lagged behind in putting in place concrete measures.

In agriculture, the EC listed nine key critical matters.

One related to the common market in milk, specifically the adoption of legislation regulating the main mechanisms of allocation and administration of milk quotas, setting up a National Milk Board and Regional Milk Board, approval of milk purchases, installation and accreditation of independent milk laboratories for fat content analyses, elaboration of transitional agreements for marketing milk in Bulgaria for the period ending April 2009, and others.

The OSI report said that the Government had dealt with only one of these issues, and the OSI proposed an evaluation of the six additional measures.

On justice and home affairs, the OSI’s conclusion was that Government measures stress the making of efforts towards a specific end, rather than on the result of those efforts.

“A number of measures are rather self-serving and can hardly demonstrate that, when implemented, they will lead to attainment of a specific objective”.

According to OSI experts, steps in key areas such as the judicial system and the fight against organised crime and corruption “seem like ad hoc responses to the EC report rather than following clear priorities”.

Government actions concentrated on the pre-trial phase of criminal proceedings, the fight against organised crime and corruption - areas outlined by the EC as cause for serious concern.

The OSI conclusion on this issue was that control over implementation of these measures lacked a clear structure, and that no single measure in any of the five areas of serious concern had been assessed as “not implemented”.

Of a total of 92 measures in the five areas, 31 were assessed by the OSI as “implemented”, 35 as “implemented to an extent” and 26 as “not actually implemented”.

A quantitative analysis of the extent of implementation of the measures showed that the most substantial progress had been achieved in the area of Protection of Intellectual Property Rights.

The same could be said for the Regional Policy and Freedom to Provide Services areas, where the OSI registered “satisfactory progress in overcoming delays”.

The OSI’s conclusion was that the least progress in overcoming delays in reforms had been in the areas of justice and home affairs and agriculture where 41 per cent of the measures were still not implemented in effect.

Formally, there are no delays or non-implementation.

Measures set out in the Government Action Plan had been implemented on schedule, such as the establishment of a Council for Protection of Intellectual Property.

The OSI concluded that the principle of a public consultation process should be observed. “An impression is created that the adoption of the acts revising the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act and the Radio and Television Act was rushed and not all parties concerned were invited to express opinions”.

Corrective measures had been taken in practically all areas about which there had been critical remarks.

By January 16 2006, the results of the analysis show the following: steps in response to five of the critical remarks had been fully implemented; measures on eight of the critical remarks had been implemented to an extent; and measures in response to nine of the critical remarks had not been fully implemented.

In the area of Protection of Intellectual Property Rights, the requirements of the EC had, formally, been met. The steps adopted would have to be analysed in terms of their likely effectiveness and the degree of liaison among the relevant enforcement authorities.

The same applied to the area of Freedom to Provide Services. About 90 per cent of the steps needed to increase compulsory motor insurance compliance by the end of March 2006 have been taken. With this record of performance, there is no reason why 90 per cent of vehicles should not be properly insured by that date, meaning that in this case, Bulgaria would meet the European Commission’s EU membership criteria.

The OSI found a positive side effect of the measures taken: in coming to grips with one problem (the civil liability insurance compliance rate), the state administration was compelled by circumstances to address several other pressing problems which had been postponed time and again. One of these problems (a lesser one) was clearing the Ministry of Interior databases of disused motor vehicles, which are kept on record there, and the improved sharing of information among various government institutions.

The other, more important result, was the State’s commitment to find a solution to the numerous motor vehicles abandoned in streets and gardens.

It should also be borne in mind that despite the large number and variety of government institutions committed to the search for a solution to the civil liability issue, there had been improved co-ordination among them, as well as rapid and productive decision-making.

For the first time in many years, the state administration assumed its own responsibility in the process: this is arguably the best result of the measures taken to strengthen enforcement of civil liability insurance. Previously, the state administration ignored the social effect of this insurance and believed that its sale affected only the business interests of insurance companies. That is why the state administration was not directly involved in raising public awareness of this type of insurance and in improving compliance.

The evaluation in the area of Regional Policy showed that there was just one measure that had not been fully implemented, and its implementation is particularly important for Bulgaria’s successful preparation for membership in January 2007. This measure is the Presentation of the drafts of Operational Programmes and the draft of a 2007-2013 National Development Plan to the EC for consultation.

The relevant institutions responsible intend to implement all their commitments within a relatively short time limit, but this would require further serious and consistent work and sustained co-ordination of efforts.

The evaluation of the implementation of measures in the area of agriculture was mixed.

The reason for this was the interdependence and the need for rigorous succession in implementing the measures.

The delay in the implementation of measures requiring substantial financial and human resources and use of technology gave cause for serious concern: the Land Parcel Identification System, the installation of independent laboratories for fat content analysis; establishment of border veterinary inspection posts etc.

Regardless of the large number of measures falling into the “not fully implemented” category, the experts’ observations showed the existence of proper co-ordination between the institutions in charge, which gave grounds for guarded optimism that the measures would be properly implemented after being adopted.

The fact that 72 per cent of the measures under Chapter 24: Justice and Home Affairs could not be listed as implemented was cause for serious concern, considering the short time left. Since the peer review on this chapter is due in February 2006, the relevant institutions have just a few more weeks to demonstrate progress on the commitments assumed. The positive finding of the Interim Report was that there are no measures that could not be implemented, but the delay raised doubts about the quality of the results that the measures would produce.

The pace of implementation of the measures suggested that all measures planned could be implemented by the deadline, the OSI said.

The state of progress in agriculture and justice and home affairs was cause for concern, as by the cut-off date of the Interim Report, insufficient progress had been achieved in these areas to guarantee that the delays would be overcome.

Some of the most important measures that had not been implemented were linked to the fundamentals of law and order in this country: amendments to the constitution, the  new Criminal Procedure Code and Ministry of Interior Act, and the Administrative Procedure Code.

These measures should be the result of a sustained effort by politicians, administrators and experts and their implementation should emphasise legal conformity, the overall national legal system, the existence of administrative capacity and, last but not least, the democratic nature of the standard-setting and law-making process.

Another conclusion was that the measures taken on the chapter on justice and home affairs on the fight against corruption and organised crime were not effective.

Concerning corruption, the reports from the European Commission on Bulgaria’s progress have repeatedly noted the need for tangible results in countering corruption and not just its nominal condemnation.

Monitoring of the measures intended to fight corruption showed that the efforts of the executive were concentrated mostly on drafting reports and strategies.

Again, just as with the important revisions to the regulatory framework, dialogue with civil society organisations on countering corruption was not at the appropriate level.
In respect of the monitoring process itself, the executive authorities meant to implement the specific measures were rather reluctant to provide information.

Keeping the Bulgarian public informed of the activities of the executive on honouring the EU accession treaty commitments was no less important than supplying information to the EC and its experts, the OSI report said.

With a view to implementing the commitments assumed, it was particularly important to streamline the management of the implementation of the measures required.

In the course of the monitoring, serious problems were detected in respect of inter-institutional co-ordination and flaws in the system of institutional control over the implementation of the measures.

As to the effectiveness of enforcement of the instruments adopted, the measures planned (establishment of a Council, establishment of a working group to conduct an awareness-raising campaign) were merely prerequisites for effective enforcement.

Regarding the public procurement system, further efforts were needed to create a system for effective and transparent absorption of the EU resources through competitive bidding procedures.

The strategy for restructuring of Public Financial Control should be implemented at an accelerated pace, the report said.

The EC should be supplied on a regular basis with information on progress in competitive examination procedures for appointing additional expert personnel to structures designated as Managing Authorities and Intermediate Bodies of Operational Programmes. The functions of the structures designated as Intermediate Bodies of the Operational Programmes should be clearly defined, the report said.

General conclusions
* The OSI report concluded that the pace of implementation of measures suggested that all measures planned could be implemented by the deadline.

* The status in the areas of Agriculture and Justice and Home Affairs was cause for concern, as by the cut-off date of the Interim Report, insufficient progress had been achieved to guarantee that the delays would be overcome.

* The effectiveness and quality of implementation of the measures remained an issue of concern, owing to the pace at which the reforms were being carried out.

 The principal conclusion of the Interim Report was that Bulgaria retained its chances of implementing on time the measures for accession to the EU on 1 January 2007, but a substantial increase of effort was required to overcome the delay in the areas  of Agriculture and Justice and Home Affairs, and there was a need for closer attention to quality in the implementation and enforcement of the measures planned.

Government efforts
Efforts by the Government to respond to the October 2005 EC report have concentrated on the those outlined by the report as “red”.

This included reform of the judicial system. Bulgaria has received acknowledgement by the Bulgaria-EU Association Council of the country’s advancement in justice legislation, including the adoption of a new Criminal Procedure Code and proposed amendments to the Judiciary Act.

Bulgaria’s Government has promised to enhance its administrative capacity and to improve co-ordination at local level to ensure the effective absorption of EU structural funds. 

European Integration Minister Meglena Kouneva supported the conclusions made by the Open Society Institute Sofia, and emphasised that more actions were needed by Bulgarian society so that Bulgaria could meet the deadline to be ready to join the EU on January 1 2007. 

EU officials reacted positively to the election of the new Prosecutor-General, Boris Velchev, who is to take up the post on February 22.

In recent months, Bulgaria’s Parliament also played its part in the country’s efforts to achieve EU accession in January 2007.  Many new laws in connection with EU accession have been passed and the required changes to the constitution have reached the first reading stage in Parliament. 

Ratification process
Of a total of 25 members of the European Union, the number of the countries that have ratified Bulgaria’s accession treaty as of February 1 2006 came to 11.

The most recent country to ratify the treaty was Latvia on January 30 2006.

The others were Malta, Italy, Spain, The Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Cyprus, Slovenia, Hungary and Slovakia.

Procedures for ratification of the treaty have started in the parliaments of Poland, Belgium, the UK, Ireland, Austria, Denmark and Sweden.

Talks are being held at government level with the other seven EU countries about starting the ratification process.

On January 27, Prime Minister Sergei Stanishev told Parliament that, for the moment, his Government’s priority was the talks with key EU members Germany, France and the Netherlands.

His statement came as a result that leaders in those countries had remarked that Bulgaria’s progress towards EU membership and that the ratification of its accession treaty might be delayed if not postponed.

On January 31, Godelieve van Heteren, chairperson of the Committee on European Affairs in the Netherlands’ parliament, and a member of the ruling Christian Democratic Party, said in an interview with Deutsche Welle Radio that the ratification of Bulgaria’s treaty scheduled for February 1 was in question because several parties has expressed concern about Bulgaria’s readiness to join the union.

However, the Netherlands is expected to ratify the treaty.

A different message came from Germany and France.

Both countries have said that they would wait to see the next report by the EC on Bulgaria’s efforts to meet EU criteria. The report is scheduled to come out on May 17 2006 and it seems that this will be the deciding date for Bulgaria on its way to the EU.