The integration process of Bosnia and Herzegovina into the EU: 14 priorities from the Opinion of the European Commission 4 years later

Overview of the implementation of legislative and institutional reforms in order to fulfill 14 key priorities that were set as a condition for further progress of BiH in the EU integration process.

Four years after the European Commission adopted the Opinion on Bosnia and Herzegovina’s application for EU membership, the authorities in BiH have not made progress in the implementation of 14 key priorities that were set as a condition for BiH’s further progress in the EU integration process. Based on the analysis of Transparency International in Bosnia and Herzegovina, only one priority has been fully implemented and it refers to the functioning of the Parliamentary Committee for Stabilization and Association, which was established but did not meet in the previous period, while in five priorities, the implementation started partially.

Key reforms of the legal framework set in the priorities, related to the improvement of electoral legislation, the Law on the HJPC and the reform of the Constitutional Court of BiH, the Law on Courts, anti-corruption laws, such as the law on conflict of interest and the protection of corruption whistleblowers, have been awaiting adoption for years. On the other hand, reforms of the institutional framework regarding the professionalization of the civil service, cooperation between law enforcement agencies, improvement of efficiency in the prosecution of corruption and organized crime, and depoliticization and restructuring of public enterprises, have hardly even begun.

In some segments, there has even been a setback, in the form of proposing solutions that are aimed at restricting human rights and freedoms, especially in the segment of freedom of speech and expression and freedom of association, and in the segment of the functioning of coordination in the matter of EU integration, as well as ensuring legal certainty in in terms of the division of competences between levels of government.

Namely, the latest initiatives in the direction of not applying the decisions of the Constitutional Court, contesting jurisdiction, and vetoing and blocking the fulfillment of priorities, certainly call into question not only the readiness to implement priorities, but also the complete institutional order in the country.