神戸大学附属図書館デジタルアーカイブ
入力補助
English
カテゴリ
学内刊行物
ランキング
アクセスランキング
ダウンロードランキング
https://doi.org/10.24546/00520456
このアイテムのアクセス数:
10
件
(
2024-04-20
18:59 集計
)
閲覧可能ファイル
ファイル
フォーマット
サイズ
閲覧回数
説明
00520456 (fulltext)
pdf
164 KB
メタデータ
ファイル出力
メタデータID
00520456
アクセス権
open access
出版タイプ
Version of Record
タイトル
International Organizations and Democratization Models The Case of EU Accession of Romania
著者
著者名
Jora, Silviu
収録物名
Kobe University law review
巻(号)
40
ページ
15-36
出版者
神戸大学大学院法学研究科
刊行日
2006
公開日
2007-05-29
抄録
The paper reviews some aspects of Romania’s democratic consolidation in the context of EU accession process. The core idea is that the accession process of Romania, as a “problematic case”, represents an experimental laboratory for innovations in the EU conditionality methodology to be applied on future “problematic” candidates. The recent EU practice of pushing the political conditionality to its limits, and the promising results, generated a precedent which will certainly become ordinary rule for the next enlargements. 1. EU - A World Democratizing Pivot··17 2. The case of Romania··18 3. Couping with the Political Criteria - The Specificity of Romania··20 4. Accession negotiations and EU conditionality ··24 5. “Novelties” in the Conditionality: The Safeguard Clauses··25 6. Transparency and public involvement··28 7. Horizontal criteria: the Administrative Capacity··28 8. The limits of Brussels driven “Europeanization”··29 9. Conclusion ? Reflections on Romania’s experience··31 Bibliography··35 The paper begins with a short mentioning of the importance of EU as a democratizing agent in Europe and World wide. With the Enlargement, EU has proved its vocation as a world democratic “pivot”. The second section provides some background explanations for the characteristic of Romania as a problematic case in the context of the 5th Enlargement. Considering the initial extremely poor ratings given on Romania’s chances for democratization it is very interesting to follow its cursus honorum up to the status of member in one of the most exclusive democratic clubs. The right mix of “carrots and sticks” from the part of the Union, combined with political will and European vocation from the part of the candidate were the ingredients of this magic. The third section reviews some particularities of EU political criteria for Romania. The issues of minorities, children rights and rule of law related reforms are tackled. The forth section focuses on the significance of accession negotiation stage for the conditionality effectiveness in determining the speed and depth of reforms. This is the stage when the “Europeanization” machine is reaching its peak, due to the specific typology of the accession negotiations. Chapter24-Justice and Home Affairs receives a particular attention as being directly related to the political criteria. This chapter has been one the most difficult and the last to be concluded by Romania. The fifth section of the paper is dedicated to the “novelties” in the conditionality which were brought in the context of negotiating the last chapters: competition and justice and home affairs. The paper explains that it was in the context of the formidable tension for concluding the negotiations in time that the Commission found the opportunity to refine its conditionality “recipe” with new ingredients in the form of the “pre accession safeguard clauses”. This stands as evidence of Commission’s skill and creativity in adjusting its instruments. The sixth section shortly tackles the issue of transparency and public involvement in the EU accession context with a particular focus on the negotiations phase, when some reforms with negative social impact were to be taken. The advance in the transparency and the level of public involvement represented a concrete step forward in terms of democratic consolidation. The administrative capacity horizontal criterion is approached in the seventh section. It is explained that, like in all the other candidate states, the public administration reform in Romania followed a rather formal topdown approach, without consistent impact in terms of performance. At the same time, the negotiations phase brought a change in the way the “Europeanization” has been perceived in Romania as the authorities finally understood that the EU accession process largely represents the management of domestic transformation and not a sophisticated diplomatic exercise with Brussels. The eight section shortly reviews the limits of Brussels driven Europeanization, respectively the excessive “top down” approach resulting in formal institutions, the lack of conceptual clarity of its criteria and the issue of exporting the Community “democratic deficit”, which is brought along by the “fussier” analysts. The paper concludes with some reflections for the present and prospective candidates based on Romania’s experience as a “problematic” case. It is stressed that in the Balkans and especially in the Black Sea Area the Union will face the challenge of providing the right mix of “sticks” and “carrots” in order to achieve conditionality leverage with “Europeanization” effect. The accession process will be more gradual while the Union will have to provide sufficient interim benefits and credible perspectives in order to keep the target countries within its reforming gravitational power. The paper emphasizes the direct link between the accession horizon and conditionality efficiency. The case of Romania shows that EU obtained maximum leverage power after the accession date has been within reachable horizon. Thus, the theory that the conditionality is decreasing when an accession date is set has no empirical support as Romania and Bulgaria offer evidence for the opposite. When a candidate sees the shining “carrot” within touchable distance it will do anything to complete the final leap. For the Black Sea cases where the EU member states are reluctant the commit even to a remote accession date, which consequently means weaker conditionality leverage, the paper suggests a smaller but tasty “carrot”: the Shengen visa free regime. The “visa free regime” might sound more appealing and tangible, and more worth the effort of accelerated reforms, than a fuzzy and remote “peace of the Internal Market” perspective. Finally, the paper reviews some other formulas experienced in the course of the 5th Enlargement like: “the group therapy”, the progressive inclusion in Community programs, the Synergy between European and Euro-Atlantic integration and the importance of the “bilateral dimension” with the key Member States.
カテゴリ
Kobe University law review
>
40号(2006)
紀要論文
詳細を表示
資源タイプ
departmental bulletin paper
言語
English (英語)
ISSN
0075-6423
OPACで所蔵を検索
CiNiiで学外所蔵を検索
NCID
AA00261076
OPACで所蔵を検索
CiNiiで表示
関連情報
NAID
110006215246
CiNiiで表示
ホームへ戻る