Better than Paradise: Here's what Kosovo will get when it enters the EU

The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom recently ruled that Prime Minister Boris Johnson had acted illegally when he sought to suspend the United Kingdom Parliament for five weeks to avoid a debate on his plans for a Brexit “without deals”. This decision underscores the centrality of the rule of law in democratic governance. But as the rule of law prevails in the United Kingdom, there are concerns that are growing elsewhere in the European Union. For the EU, protection of the rule of law is an obligation such as leaders must be determined to preserve.

In his book “Origine of Political Order”, politicologist Francis Fukuyama argues that rule of law is the most difficult pillar for building a successful modern society. Organising the governing administration and holding elections for a legislative body are relatively easy, and only a small number of failed states have no functional public administration or legislatures. But in most countries, lack of rule of law is the primary source of instability and political degradation.

For the EU, rule of law has central significance, because the EU is not just a joint economic enterprise [although, as economist Hernando de Soto stressed, the rule of law is also a precondition for a developed market economy]. Primary purpose [Raison dêtre] The EU, like that of its predecessor, is ensuring peace between European states and preserving human rights in them. And the bloc is founded on common values embedded in its agreements.

The EU's commitment to rule of law, established in Article 2 of the European Union Agreement, is direct. It stands for legitimacy, legal security, prohibitions of arbitrary exercise of authority, division of powers, and an independent and effective judiciary. Respect for rule of law affects different levels of society in very practical forms: at the level of the Union, states, companies and citizens.

Within the EU, rule of law is not a political attitude or an unattainable moral ideal, but a principle for which political officials and courts are responsible to preserve. Furthermore, the responsibility system also works on the other side: The EU is obliged to ensure that rights under agreements are respected by member states.

These rights and obligations were highlighted in June, when the European Court of Justice ruled that Controversity Reform of the Supreme Court violated the EU law, and also undermined the principle of the judges' invisibility. After all, law courts in member states are also court of law within the European Union. Independence of courts is fundamental to protect fundamental rights to ensure judicial protection and fair judgment. The legal system and judiciary within any EU member state is thus obliged to meet European standards, and the European Court of Justice is obliged to intervene when necessary.

But however, member states of the European Union tend to abide by the decisions of the European Court of Justice, this is only a preferential solution to cutting threats to the rule of law. Fortunately, the EU has other elements to support this fundamental pillar of democratic government.

The first, since 2014, EU member states have conducted a dialogue to promote and preserve the rule of law, including the context of digitalisation, migration, and plurality of media. Although thesematic discussions have been very productive in breaking the basis for common consensus, the meal came for strengthening the rule of law dialogue. It should be more systematic and based on facts, an annual inventory of states for the rule of law in the EU. The new revision of the rule of law suggested by the European Commission should provide the necessary data. This effort would allow member states to promote a more positive, constructive and unifying discussion.

The second, the European Parliament voted in September 2018 to launch a process under Article 7 of E to address violations of the rule of law in Hungary [a similar procedure that was initiated earlier on Poland]. This process requires the European Council to assess whether the rule of law is being compromised by any EU country. If there are serious and Persian violations of the rule of law, the Council has the power to suspend certain EU membership rights for these countries.

The latter, protecting the rule of law is important for protecting the EU budget. For that reason, the Commission has proposed the inclusion of law and law enforcement in the future seven-year budget, or multi-year financial structure, that would begin from 2021 to 2027. In particular, the EU could block its funds for member states if shortcomings are observed in the rule of law. This new condition aims to restrain, not force. After all, the task for protecting the EU budget requires strict implementation of European agreement values.

Historically, some undemocratic societies through rule of law have gradually developed into democratic society. By contrast, societies without the rule of law experience the deterioration of democracy. Politologist Steven Levitsky and the other Daniel Ziblat have described how authoritarian rulers have killed democracy by rewriteing the rules and apprehending judges. In other words, they end the rule of law by distorting legislation and corrupting the judicial system. Democracy therefore dies, even if the facade of majority power remains.

While building a system based on the rule of law may be awkward, its collapse is much easier, and it could collapse the description of Ernest Hemingway of someone who owns: “first gradually, then suddenly.” That's why rule of law took constant care everywhere, even in countries with long democratic traditions.

Keeping rule of law requires determination and foresight. His defenders must act promptly and firmly. And if one step doesn't get enough, another should do it.

The author is Minister of European Affairs of Finland. The text was taken from Project Syndicante and translated into Albanian by Periscope.  The original title is the test of the Order of Law.