Montenegro will not have the right of veto only on one thing that the indigenous countries in the European Union have, and that is the possibility of vetoing the negotiation process with other candidate countries for EU membership, sources well-informed about Montenegro's negotiation process with the EU told "Vijesti". In all other cases - unless it is a question of so-called safeguards that are limited in time from six months to several years - Podgorica will have the right of veto, like any other EU member state, added our contact in the EU.
In other words, Montenegro will not be able to realize its interests and goals in bilateral relations using the negotiation process, as Croatia or Bulgaria do for North Macedonia, with the Western Balkan candidates for EU membership, plus Ukraine and Moldova. This will apply to Albania and any future EU member.
This is an old German proposal that has been fully adopted by a large number of EU member states, and there is practically a consensus in the Union that this measure should be included in Montenegro's Accession Treaty with the EU. Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama has already made it clear that Tirana will have no problem giving up its veto right on the entry of other members into the EU, on the contrary, it will be happy to give it up.
One does not need to be very knowledgeable about European-Balkan relations to understand that the main driving motive of the German proposal is preventive action so that Serbia cannot block Kosovo or vice versa, so that Pristina can build a ramp for Belgrade. Bearing in mind that Serbia will not seriously approach the EU as long as the current regime is in power in Belgrade, and Kosovo as long as Albin Kurti is at the head of the government in Pristina, this is a matter of prevention in the long run.
KOS MISINTERPRETED
There has been a lot of fuss about abolishing the right of veto, but in essence it is a smokescreen because there is no serious majority, let alone consensus, for new members to give up the right of veto outright.
"The veto is limited only to enlargement, anything that would go beyond that would threaten the right to equality and thus undermine the foundations of the EU. It is true that there are countries that would like to extend the suspension of the veto right to new member states to several more sectors, but on the other hand, there is a very strong bloc of states that oppose such a possibility and they have behind them the positions of all relevant and most influential European experts in European law who are absolutely against such a possibility," a diplomatic source from an EU member state explained to "Vijesti".
Incidentally, the story about the abolition of the "veto" right for new members was launched by certain German think tanks and journalists in Brussels. Commissioner Marta Koss explained this in an interview with the Financial Times, but her answers were interpreted in the wrong way. The text in the English daily was corrected, but almost no one paid attention to the corrected version, because the story about the abolition of the veto liked some of the public, while others considered it an attractive story to increase clicks and gain attention.
Commissioner Kos did not talk about the denial of the right of veto, but about the protective measures, so-called safeguards, which were already applied before and were included in the Accession Treaties of Bulgaria, Romania and Croatia. These are tasks, mainly the implementation of adopted reforms according to European standards, which the new members had to fulfill in order to become equal members in the relevant sectors.
PROTECTIVE MEASURES, NOT ABOLISHMENT OF VETO RIGHTS
The safeguard measures were not subject to serious and strict monitoring and this proved to be a bad practice, especially when it comes to Bulgaria. Let us recall that the deadlines for the implementation of the safeguard measures have expired, and Bulgaria has not done what was required of it and has passed without any consequences. In the case of Bulgaria, these were safeguard measures related to free access to the labor market, as well as in the areas of the internal market, economy, justice and home affairs.
The EU is working to ensure that the mistakes from the previous two enlargements with the Balkan countries are not repeated, which is why protective measures, their monitoring, and sanctions in the event that they are not respected by the new EU members, starting with Montenegro, are being defined in detail and with dedication.
The first part of the application of safeguard measures will relate to the period during the ratification process, i.e. from the signing of the Accession Treaty until the formal admission of the new member. The second part of the safeguard measures will have a temporary character upon entry into the EU. This will not be a permanent denial of rights, but will be limited in duration from a minimum of six months to several years.
The EU intends to use safeguard measures as an instrument to guarantee that adopted reforms and laws will be implemented in an efficient and valid manner in accordance with European standards. This is the key motive behind the EU's intention when talking about safeguard measures. It is certainly not about creating first and second tier members.
The most protective measures will be in the areas of the rule of law, the fight against corruption, organized crime and money laundering, because these are long-term reforms that require much more time for full implementation.
REVISION OF ARTICLE 7 IS NOT REALISTIC THROUGH THE ACCESSION TREATY
Some countries and think tanks believe that through the next Accession Treaty of Montenegro, they could revise Article 7, which provides for a series of sanctions, including the right to vote and access to funds for countries that do not respect the basic postulates on which the EU is based.
However, the most respected experts in EU law believe that this is not realistic, despite the fact that formally every Accession Treaty is part of the so-called primary law and in theory could serve as an instrument for inserting new elements. Lawyers believe that revising Article 7 of the Lisbon Treaty is too risky a thing that would open Pandora's box.
Article 7 is weak in the sense that the procedure for imposing sanctions against a country that grossly violates European values in the areas of human rights, freedoms, democracy, and the rule of law is quite ineffective. The procedure for imposing sanctions can be initiated by the European Commission, the European Parliament, and a third of the member states. The European Council can adopt a formal warning to a member state with a qualified four-fifths majority, but the adoption of sanctions, including the right to vote, requires unanimity minus the country whose position is being decided. Specifically, in the current situation, Hungarian Prime Minister Orbán and Slovak Prime Minister Fico can protect each other's backs by using the veto, just as Orbán and Kaczyński protected each other in the past when procedures were initiated against Hungary and Poland.
It is therefore not realistic to change Article 7 through the Accession Treaty of Montenegro, and those who spread these stories clearly do not know enough about the structure, functioning and balance of power within the EU. The reform of Article 7 is possible only through the revision of the Lisbon Treaty or through the organization of a new convention, and not through the Accession Treaty of a new member state.
MONTENEGRO ON THE RIGHT WAY TO OPEN FIVE CHAPTERS
"It is very important that everything goes according to plan and that Podgorica closes the five chapters in December to avoid spreading skepticism and seeking time to rethink the enlargement process. Such thoughts are limited to a few countries," says our European source well acquainted with Montenegro's negotiation process.
An ad hoc Working Group for drafting Montenegro's accession negotiations will soon be formed. This is being worked on very intensively, despite the fact that some member states, above all France, have certain reservations. Therefore, it would be good and necessary for Montenegro to further intensify its work on fulfilling its obligations and promises, as well as to demonstrate its determination and readiness to join the EU through concrete actions.
In relation to the work of the Working Group, there are several different views on what the future Accession Treaty should look like. However, our interlocutor in the EU institutions underlines, "any Accession Treaty must guarantee the same rights as the indigenous members. The principle of equality is necessary because the EU is based on this principle and consequently cannot be called into question. It sounds paradoxical, but the German Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe would strike down the Accession Treaty if it did not respect the principle of equality". Let us recall that in Germany, the rule is that the Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe must rule on all legal issues related to the EU and its opinion is binding on both the Government and the Bundestag.
The EU Council bodies are still discussing the closure of five chapters at the Intergovernmental Conference with Montenegro in mid-December. According to our information, it is not 100% certain that the planned five chapters will be closed, but Podgorica is in a good position to achieve this goal. It is necessary for Montenegrin institutions, from the Parliament to the Government, to fulfill a few more tasks that the authorities in Podgorica have promised to do.
The failure to appoint all judges to the Constitutional Court should not harm the planned plan to close the chapter with Montenegro, but it could emerge as a problem in the broader debate on enlargement, which has become quite toxic due to Serbia and Russia's hybrid war against the EU and the actual war against Ukraine. It is not excluded that one of the EU members will raise the issue, but so far there is no indication that this could happen.
In any case, Montenegro has time until December 10 to do everything necessary to close the five chapters. The EC and the bloc of states that wholeheartedly support EU enlargement are optimistic and are pushing for the closure of all planned chapters.
The closure of Chapter 31 was postponed until next year because the European Commission assessed that it would be too risky to force its closure, as it would burden the work, inflame discussions and unnecessarily increase the risk of a blockade by Croatia, which is the last thing that official Podgorica needs at this moment on its path to the EU.
Bonus video:
