The wording of the rather short six-page interim reports clearly conveys the understanding that Bulgaria has made some progress, while Romania's advances are "difficult to demonstrate".
As EurActiv Romania reports, it is "unprecedented news" for the Commission to have given Romania a lower mark than Bulgaria for justice reform. As the media points out, Bucharest is reproached mainly for its close ties between the judiciary and politicians, as well as a slowdown in the pace of reform.
The report clearly states: "The pace of progress noted in the Commission's report of July 2008 has not been maintained".
Romania is also criticised for the long-standing practice of investigations of high-level corruption cases being blocked by the Romanian Parliament (EurActiv 04/07/08). For its part, Bulgaria benefits from the Commission's assessment, describing it as a "significant development" in corruption and organised crime, and is credited for "some developments" in the reform of the judiciary.
Game with words
In the most telling part of the report, entitled "conclusions – outlook", the Commission says: "Bulgaria needs to show that it has put in place an autonomously functioning, stable judiciary which is able to detect and sanction conflicts of interests, corruption and organised crime and preserve the rule of law."
Sterner wording is reserved for Bulgaria's northern neighbour: "It will be crucial for Romania to achieve significant, irreversible progress by then. Romania must demonstrate the existence of an autonomously functioning, stable judiciary which is able to detect and sanction corruption and preserve the rule of law," the paper says.
Tandem 'peer review' concept in action
Despite the Commission's denials, ever since Bulgaria and Romania were invited to start accession negotiations at the Helsinki December 1999 EU summit, they have been treated in tandem.
But at different periods of time, first Bulgaria and then Romania have asked to be judged on their own merit, fearing that a poor performance by one country would slow down the better performer.
Sources from the EU institutions told EurActiv that in fact this treatment had provided results, since both Sofia and Bucharest hate to be seen as the laggard of the couple.
This internal competition illustrates the "peer review" concept, whereby a country evaluates itself not just vis-à-vis the requirements of Brussels, but also with respect to its neighbour's progress.
Conspiracy theories?
Andreas Geiger, a lobbyist working for the Bulgarian government, recently told EurActiv (EurActiv 18/11/08) that Bulgaria has been doing at least as well as Romania in reforming its judicial system, but is portrayed in a negative light by leading European media for the sake of discouraging further EU enlargement.
Yesterday, Geiger told EurActiv that he had personally been involved in improving the language of the Bulgaria report. The Bulgarian daily Dnevnik, EurActiv's partner in Bulgaria, reported heavy lobbying by Sofia to get a milder report.
Commission spokespeople denied that such lobbying had taken place. But unlike in July, when working versions of the CVM reports meant that significant last-minute changes could be detected that were believed to be the result of lobbying (EurActiv 24/07/08), the Commission has prevented such leaks this time around.
