Unit:
Κατεύθυνση Σπουδές Νοτιοανατολικής Ευρώπης: Πολιτική, Ιστορία, ΟικονομικάLibrary of the Faculties of Political Science and Public Administration, Communication and Mass Media Studies, Turkish and Modern Asian Studies, Sociology
Supervisors info:
Σουζάννα Βέρνυ, Επίκουρος Καθηγήτρια, Τμήμα Πολιτικής Επιστήμης και Δημόσιας Διοίκησης, ΕΚΠΑ
Original Title:
Alternatives to the Annual EU Commission Monitoring Reports to Promote and Assess Compliance with the Copenhagen Political Criteria for admission to the EU- Case-Studies with respect to Turkey
Translated title:
Alternatives to the Annual EU Commission Monitoring Reports to Promote and Assess Compliance with the Copenhagen Political Criteria for admission to the EU- Case-Studies with respect to Turkey
Summary:
In the present study we examine alternatives to the annual Commission Monitoring Reports(CMRs) to assess and promote compliance with the Copenhagen Political Criteria(CPC) for Membership of the EU, given the many CPC problems still plaguing the Balkan countries and Turkey, despite these countries being subjected to the CMRs scrutiny since 1998. We consider these alternatives for the case of Turkey, to make our study concrete. We examine three existing ones :
a) Other internal EU mechanisms(like the Accession Partnership Documents(APDs), the Opening and Closing Benchmarks for the Accession Negotiations Chapters, the annual Council Conclusions on Enlargement etc). We conclude that they have not also been in general particularly effective in the case of Turkey.
b) Quantitative Methods, developed by the WB, Freedom House(FH), the Bertelsmann Institute(BTI), the Economist Intelligence Unit(EIU), to assess Democratic Governance(including HR and Rule of Law issues). Their assessments for Turkey are similar to the CMRs, but they cannot determine concretely what is missing.
c) The CoE methods, developed over the years and involving all its main institutions(the Secretary General(SG), the Commissioner for Human Rights(CHR), the Council of Ministers(CoM), the Parliamentary Assembly(PA), the ECtHR), in order to promote compliance with the ECHR and ensure the implementation of the Judgments of the ECtHR. We find that, despite the many and commendable efforts expended, these efforts of the SG, the CHR and the PA have not been effective, while the method of the CoM since 2006 for the supervision of Judgments of the ECtHR is much more structured and has produced results in the case of Turkey, even if these results are partial and subject to many regressions.
Main subject category:
Social, Political and Economic sciences
Keywords:
EU, Council of Europe, human rights, rule of law, Turkey
Number of references:
137
File:
File access is restricted only to the intranet of UoA.
Κλωνιας.pdf
696 KB
File access is restricted only to the intranet of UoA.
