Joint Committee on European Union Affairs debate -
Wednesday, 23 Sep 2026

• Debates
• Find a debate
  • Dáil debates
  • Seanad debates
  • Committee debates
• Find a vote
  • Dáil votes
  • Seanad votes
  • Committee votes
• Parliamentary questions
  • Written questions
  • Oral questions
• Search tips
• Utterances having an adverse effect

EU Enlargement: Discussion (Resumed)

An Cathaoirleach

No apologies have been received. We are meeting with representatives of EU candidate and applicant countries to resume our discussion of enlargement of the European Union, which is part of our work programme and an important part of the values pillar of the priorities of the European Presidency that Ireland is currently hosting. The committee is engaging with ambassadors and diplomats accredited to Ireland to discuss their country's perspectives on developments in the accession process.

I am glad to welcome representatives from Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro and North Macedonia to the committee. I acknowledge H. E. Mr. Osman Topčagić - he told me how to pronounce it but I still got it wrong. I apologise to His Excellency. We are delighted to welcome him here as ambassador at the Embassy of Bosnia and Herzegovina in London and we are grateful he has travelled to be with us today. I welcome Ms. Nataša Jovović - I beg her pardon also - chargé d'affaires at the Embassy of Montenegro in London. I am grateful she has travelled to be with us today. I also welcome Mr. Mile Prangoski, deputy director of the directorate for EU at the ministry of foreign affairs of North Macedonia, who joins us online and remotely. We are grateful for his time.

As noted at our previous meeting, our aim is to have an informative discussion with our witnesses to not only enhance our understanding of progress to date but also explore the challenges that remain in our applications. While enlargement remains a merit-based process deeply rooted in the Copenhagen criteria, it is encouraging to see it re-emerge on the EU agenda. As I have said before, it is a subject of disappointment that it has been 13 years since we had a country join the European Union with Croatia being the last one. It is very important for the Irish Presidency. We were part of the first enlargement of the European Union in 1973. We have benefited enormously from membership and are anxious that that opportunity be shared with any country that wants to be part of the European Union. We have had a connection with enlargement over the years. German reunification was largely negotiated during our Presidency in 1990. We were part of what we call the Day of Welcomes in 2004, when ten states acceded to the European Union.

We had the Presidency at that time. That was very important. We were central to the negotiations on the Croatian accession as well. It is something we want to foster, encourage and facilitate wherever we can. That is something we hope will happen, or will be advanced at least, during our Presidency.

Before we begin, I will say a note on privilege. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is important that they comply with any such direction.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I remind members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present. However, there is no one joining us online, so I do not need to go into that.

The witnesses will each have five minutes to make their opening statement, after which I will open the floor to members. Members will have an opportunity to put issues to the witnesses for them to address or answer. I will begin with Ambassador Topčagić, followed by Ms Jovović, before concluding with the opening statement from Mr. Prangoski. I will turn it over to Ambassador Topčagić now and the floor is his.

H.E. Mr. Osman Topčagić

I thank the Cathaoirleach and members of the committee for the invitation and the opportunity to address the committee at an important moment for Bosnia and Herzegovina and its European integration process.

Allow me first to underline the very good and friendly bilateral relations between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Ireland, based on mutual respect, shared European values and strong support for the European integration process. In this context, we particularly welcomed the opening of the embassy of Ireland in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which became operational in Sarajevo in 2025. We see this as an important step towards further strengthening political, economic and overall bilateral relations between our two countries. We also highly appreciate Ireland’s continuous support for the European perspective of Bosnia and Herzegovina and its consistent commitment to a credible enlargement policy. We particularly welcome the priorities of the Irish Presidency of the Council of the European Union, centred on competitiveness, values and security. These priorities strongly resonate with Bosnia and Herzegovina’s own European path. We also welcome the importance Ireland attaches to enlargement, which it rightly recognises as an important instrument for Europe’s security and prosperity, as well as its strong emphasis on the rule of law in both the Europe Union and candidate countries.

For Bosnia and Herzegovina, a credible enlargement policy contributes directly to economic convergence and competitiveness, strengthens European values and the rule of law, and contributes to the security and stability of Europe as a whole. Membership of Bosnia and Herzegovina in the European Union remains a strategic goal and one of the key foreign policy priorities of our country. The European Council’s decision to open accession negotiations with Bosnia and Herzegovina was an important political milestone. Our immediate priority is now to complete the remaining key steps necessary to move towards an operational negotiating process. Particular importance is attached to the adoption of the Law on the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Law on Courts, fully aligned with European standards, as well as to progress regarding the appointment of the chief negotiator. In parallel, the adoption of the negotiating framework and the holding of the first intergovernmental conference remain the next steps of key importance for formally advancing Bosnia and Herzegovina’s accession negotiations.

Since Bosnia and Herzegovina was granted candidate status in December 2022, important progress has been made in implementing the recommendations of the European Commission. A number of important laws relevant to the European integration process have been adopted, including legislation in the areas of access to information, prevention of money laundering and terrorist financing, conflict of interest, border control and personal data protection. Important steps have also been taken in strengthening co-operation with EU agencies and institutions, including agreements with Eurojust and Frontex. Bosnia and Herzegovina continues to demonstrate its clear strategic orientation through full alignment with the European Union’s common foreign and security policy. Our alignment with EU declarations, positions and decisions remains at 100%. For us this is not simply a technical requirement of the accession process but a clear geopolitical and strategic choice. Bosnia and Herzegovina also welcomes the European Union’s growth plan for the western Balkans and the opportunities offered through gradual integration into selected EU policies and parts of the Single Market. However, gradual integration must complement, and not replace, the objective of full EU membership.

The enlargement process must remain credible, merit based and predictable. Candidate countries must deliver reforms, while achieved progress should also be followed by corresponding steps from the European Union. In the current geopolitical and security environment, enlargement is no longer simply a technical process. It is a strategic investment in Europe’s security, stability and prosperity. Bosnia and Herzegovina remains firmly committed to its European path and to fulfilling the obligations undertaken in the accession process. Our immediate objective is clear: to complete the remaining reforms, adopt the negotiating framework and move towards the holding of the first intergovernmental conference as soon as possible. More Europe in the western Balkans and more Europe in Bosnia and Herzegovina means more stability, peace and economic prosperity.

I thank members for their attention. I look forward to our discussion.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank the ambassador very much. I invite Ms Jovović to make her opening statement.

Ms Nataša Jovović

A Chathaoirligh, a chomhaltaí oirirce den Chomhchoiste um Ghnóthaí an Aontais Eorpaigh, the Chair, Deputy Ward, and distinguished members of the committee, it is a particular honour to represent Montenegro and address the joint committee in a year that marks 20 years since our two countries established diplomatic relations. That anniversary coincides with Ireland’s Presidency of the Council of the European Union and with the most decisive phase of Montenegro’s accession negotiations. Allow me to express our deep appreciation of Ireland’s consistent support for the European integration of Montenegro and of the decision to place enlargement among the Presidency’s highest priorities. Montenegro remains fully committed to its European path as the front-runner in the process. We welcome the renewed political momentum behind enlargement and will meet it by honouring obligations and providing concrete results. Montenegro has opened all 33 negotiating chapters. Eighteen of these chapters have been provisionally closed, more than half of the complete framework. Two of those closures, on competition policy and the customs union, were achieved in July, at the first intergovernmental conference of the Irish Presidency. We regard this as a concrete expression of Ireland’s commitment to a merit-based enlargement policy.

Our strategic goal remains clear, to close the remaining chapters by the end of this year and become the 28th member state of the European Union by 2028.

That objective is not a slogan. It is a result of sustained parliamentary momentum, intensive co-ordination among the legislative, executive and judicial branches, and public support that remains stable at around 70%. Concrete results and consistent progress in all chapters motivate us to continue strengthening political and social consensus around our European future.

Since the beginning of the negotiations, we have kept the process transparent and inclusive. Representatives of the NGO sector, civil society, business community, academic community and parliament sit in the working groups on the acquis. That is how the process stays close to the citizens.

On foreign policy, there is no ambiguity. Montenegro maintains 100% alignment with the Common Foreign and Security Policy, including restrictive measures, which we transpose into the national legal system.

The EU-Western Balkans Summit, which Montenegro successfully hosted in Tivat in June of this year, has confirmed the strategic importance of the enlargement policy and Montenegro’s role as a platform for regional dialogue and co-operation grounded in European values. Delivering on Montenegro’s accession would show that the European Union keeps its promises and would strengthen trust in enlargement across the western Balkans and other candidate countries.

An ad hoc working group for the drafting of Montenegro’s accession treaty was established in April. In June, the European Commission adopted a financial package, which sets out the budgetary arrangements that would apply to Montenegro upon accession to the European Union. That proposal clearly demonstrates that the Union is preparing for us as a future member.

We know that membership is earned, not granted. A substantial body of legislation has been adopted this year to align with the acquis, and the institutions required by closing benchmarks are being put in place or reorganised. Parliament adopted constitutional amendments on the judicial council and prosecutorial council in line with Venice Commission and European Commission recommendations. New laws on the prevention of corruption, whistleblower protection, confiscation of the proceeds of crime, weapons and ammunition, protection from domestic violence, personal data and gender equality have been adopted.

Chapters 23 and 24, including public administration reform, remain the measure of our credibility. We continue to strengthen the transparency and inclusiveness of the legislative process, in full accordance with European standards and international law. The independence of the judiciary and the autonomy of the state prosecutor’s office remain key pillars of the rule of law and essential preconditions for an effective fight against crime and corruption. This month, parliament adopted a proposal to start amending the constitution by excluding the immunity of the President and members of the government for criminal offences against official duty.

Distinguished members, Ireland has long been a strong advocate of enlargement, and this committee has a distinctive place in that effort. Through the parliamentary dimension of the Presidency, Ireland helps keep enlargement merit based, transparent and accountable to citizens. We ask for the continued attention and encouragement of this committee and Oireachtas through the rest of the Presidency as we work to close the remaining chapters and become the 28th member state.

Mr. Mile Prangoski

First, I offer warm greetings from Skopje and thank the Chair and the honourable members of the committee for the invitation and the opportunity to address them today, albeit in a virtual setting, and share North Macedonia’s perspective on its European path. Our relationship and engagement with Ireland today is solid and increasingly substantive. Minister Mucunski’s recent visit to Dublin provided an important opportunity to further strengthen our dialogue, including on North Macedonia’s European perspective. The participation of our parliamentary delegation in the meeting of the chairpersons of the Conference of Parliamentary Committees for Union Affairs, COSAC, that took place in July further reinforced the parliamentary dimension of this relationship. Most recently, the Deputy Prime Minister and minister for European affairs, Bekim Sali, was also in Dublin for the informal meeting of the General Affairs Council. In this context, we are particularly grateful for Ireland’s active and consistent support for our EU accession process and for keeping enlargement high on the European agenda.

In fact, Dublin has a particular place in our European journey. It was in March 2004 in Dublin, during the Irish Presidency of the Council, that our country submitted its application for EU membership. More than two decades later, despite sustained commitment and difficult compromises on our part, the accession process has yet to deliver the progress that such efforts should reasonably produce. Our direction of travel, however, has remained clear. EU membership remains our highest strategic objective. Our focus is firmly on delivering reforms and demonstrating that North Macedonia is ready to move forward.

Since the beginning of this year, we have significantly improved implementation of the reform agenda under the growth plan. This progress has been clearly recognised by the European Commission. To date, North Macedonia has received €142.1 million under the reform and growth facility, and we intend to maintain this pace and make full use of the opportunities provided by the growth plan. We also attach particular importance to the tangible progress in gradual integration, from our successful integration into the single euro payments area and advances on green lanes and other areas, to the opening of negotiations on extending the EU’s roam like at home regime to the western Balkans, all of which bring concrete benefits of European integration closer to our citizens and businesses.

Our European approach also has a strong regional dimension. We remain committed to deeper regional co-operation, economic integration and better connectivity. We lie at the intersection of corridor VIII and corridor X, two strategic routes connecting our region with the wider European market. Developing these corridors has been a priority, given their importance for trade and mobility, regional resilience and stronger economic integration.

Energy connectivity is part of the same vision. Our ambition is to strengthen North Macedonia’s role as a regional energy and transit hub. The gas interconnector with Greece will provide access to new sources and liquefied natural gas, LNG, infrastructure, while further interconnection with Serbia can extend this route northwards and strengthen links with central Europe. These projects contribute to diversification, security of supply and closer integration of the region into the European energy market.

Our broader strategic record reflects the same European orientation. North Macedonia remains fully aligned with the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy, contributes to European security as a NATO ally and through EU missions and operations, and continues to strongly support Ukraine both practically and politically. We remain a committed partner to the EU in the multilateral forums as well, including through our membership of the UN Human Rights Council, our incoming term as a member of the Economic and Social Council, ECOSOC, of the United Nations in 2027, as well as our forthcoming chairmanship of the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers in November 2027.

At the same time, the key challenge for our accession has remained ensuring that the European perspective remains clear and predictable. The path towards membership must be credible and based on established accession criteria and not burdened by bilateral demands related to identity and history. This is not only a question for North Macedonia. It goes to the credibility of enlargement policy itself and, more broadly, to the European Union’s ability to translate its geopolitical ambitions into tangible results. An accession perspective that becomes increasingly uncertain or open-ended risks weakening public trust, undermining the incentives of integration and creating fertile ground for greater third-party interference.

Ireland has long supported a credible and merit-based enlargement process, and we value its constructive engagement with both us and the region. Ireland’s Presidency comes at an important moment, amid growing geopolitical uncertainty and immense security challenges across Europe. In this context, enlargement, particularly towards the western Balkans, is correctly recognised not only as a policy objective but as a strategic investment in Europe’s stability, security and prosperity.

We therefore see this as an important opportunity to translate that shared strategic understanding into tangible progress on enlargement. North Macedonia will continue to do its part by delivering reforms, contributing to regional and European security and strengthening regional integration. I thank the committee and look forward to members' questions and our discussion.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank Mr. Prangoski. In a moment, I will go to members. Deputy Ó Murchú is the first to have indicated. Each member will have five minutes for questions and answers. I am going to have to leave in a few minutes to take up a speaking slot in the Dáil. Could we have a proposal as to who will take over the Chair, rather than interrupting proceedings?

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

I propose Deputy Crowe.

An Cathaoirleach

Is that agreed? Agreed. I call Deputy Ó Murchú.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

The witnesses are welcome. This will be somewhat more positive than some of these conversations have been previously. I get that the witnesses are still saying there is an absolute requirement to ensure that the European Union follows through on its part to allow for accession. We are talking about processes that are well on their way as regards significant pieces of work that have to be done on reforms and a negotiating framework, etc. Am I correct in that determination?

The following will, for obvious reasons, relate more to the ambassador, H.E. Topčagić. I apologise for my mispronunciation. It is difficult not to mention the death of Ratko Mladić. We are now 31 years on from Srebrenica and the slaughter of Bosnians. We have seen the glorification of Ratko Mladić, which cannot have been nice for the Bosnian people. I will ask about that and the ongoing issues for the Republic of Srpska and what else is impacting Bosnia's accession.

I will ask a general question of everyone. Is there a view across the region about the jailing of Hashim Thaçi and three other Kosovo Liberation Army, KLA, commanders?

H.E. Mr. Osman Topčagić

I thank the Deputy. First, on the record, my family is Topčagić.

Regarding the Deputy's question, I talked about activities connected with the European integration process, but this process is happening in a certain environment in Bosnia and Herzogovina and the wider region of the western Balkans. Part of that relates to what happened more than 30 years ago in the early nineties. We always advocated for justice and the establishment of an international court or international tribunal. It happened. We were never calling for revenge. There was no sign of that. It was established. After so many years of hiding, Ratko Mladić was found, identified and delivered to The Hague. The process was ongoing for several years. The court of first instance made a ruling. There was an appeal. The court of second instance confirmed the ruling and Ratko Mladić was sentenced to life in prison for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and everything he did or was done when he was the leader during those years. It was a court established by the Security Council of the United Nations. Thirty years after the end of the war, and the establishment of the court and all of that, there are attempts to revise history and to relativise crimes committed. That was manifest in the presence of high officials of the government at the funeral. A religious process was performed by the first priest of the Serbian Orthodox Church. The body was transferred from The Hague to Serbia on a government aeroplane and so on.

The Deputy asked where we are. After so many years and the rulings of international courts, what is the importance of the role of European integration? We were strong advocates for the European integration process. I was involved in the first calls and first addresses to the European Commission in 1998 when we asked for the initiation of this process, hoping it would bring reconciliation, progress, and the establishment of an environment based on European values and standards. In some periods, there was good progress. There were willingness and agreement to do it. However, the dark forces of nationalism prevailed during other periods and blocked the process, raising again the nationalistic agenda of creating a bigger this country or that country, and trying to hide or relativise all crimes committed. That is why we need the involvement of the international community.

In Bosnia and Herzogovina specifically, we have the presence of a High Representative. Some months ago, the High Representative resigned. At the moment, we have an acting High Representative. Questions were asked about why we need a High Representative. Domestic institutions, established according to the constitutional Bosnia and Herzogovina and according to the peace agreement, cannot function because they are blocked. They need somehow to be enabled to work properly or their decisions are not fully implemented. We still need an international authority that would act in such an environment. We have a High Representative. We have the Peace Implementation Council. We have the presence of the European Union through delegation and a special representative. All that is needed at this moment and all that should somehow work jointly to move forward because the success of Bosnia and Herzogovina is the success of the international community and the European Union. If things go in a different direction, I am afraid it will not be an issue or problem for one country. It will be reflected much wider. Nobody wants that scenario.

I appeal to Ireland, as the country presiding over the European Council in this period, and others to continue enrolment. Much has been done in this period. Many positive results have been achieved. We must not allow those dark forces to prevail and annihilate all the good results and successes that have been achieved. I thank the committee.

An Cathaoirleach

I thank the ambassador. Are we happy enough that we can move on? We are well over time.

Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú

I know we are well over time. I asked a question of others and then that general question about the three KLA commanders.

An Cathaoirleach

If others want to come in I will let them in at this stage just to complete this section.

Ms Nataša Jovović

I thank the Deputy very much for his intervention and for confirming Ireland supports the merit-based process while at the same time keeping it anchored in the rule of law, fundamental rights and human rights. We expect our delivery will also be met with delivery on the European Union's side, which will confirm that reference leads to results. We ask Ireland, having the Presidency, to keep the principle intact that a country that meets the criteria shall join.

As regards the other part of the Deputy's comment, I will state clearly that our position on Montenegro is very clear and consistent via our international obligations with declarations and resolutions that are adopted by the Parliament. Montenegro respects the judgments of international courts, of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the residual mechanisms. We have also explicitly stated that the 2021 resolution on Srebrenica our Parliament adopted dealt with individual responsibility but also that there is no place for relativisation, war crimes or genocide. It was also clear in the recent statement by our Ministry of Foreign Affairs which stated that we should respect victims and uphold the truth. That is the position of Montenegro.

An Cathaoirleach

Does Mr. Prangoski wish to come in?

Mr. Mile Prangoski

Following up on what our colleagues said, both Montenegro and Bosnia, our position is along the same lines. North Macedonia is honouring its international commitments when it comes to accountability and reconciliation for the previous wars in the former Yugoslavia. In this regard, we strongly believe that reconciliation is key for the future of the region and for stability and prosperity. European integration gives us an incredible perspective and plays a key role. Obviously, we are a country that is neighbouring both Kosovo and Serbia. We have a particular interest in having as forward-looking and as normal relations with the two countries as possible. We maintain reconciliation is key and differences from the past should be dealt with according to the rule of law and through dialogue and mutual co-operation.

Deputy Paul Nicholas Gogarty

I thank everyone for their presentations. I have a couple of questions. I will be looking at this more from the questioning side than the welcoming side. It is my personal hope that all three states join the EU as quickly as possible. I believe that in a number of instances, political machinations among EU member states have delayed the process. We see that in quite a few countries. We saw that especially with Türkiye over the years.

I will begin with Bosnia and Herzegovina and a question to ambassador Topčagić. Obviously, Europe failed Bosnia and Herzegovina during the conflict and genocide. We know Europe did not intervene the way it should have or as quickly as it should have. Morally, you would think that Europe should be trying to move Bosnia and Herzegovina into the family as quickly as possible but that has not happened. However, there are also valid questions that need to be asked in terms of delays in the Bosnian accession process. Bosnia and Herzegovina did lose out on €108 million in EU growth plan funds so there have been some bottlenecks. Is there a way of circumventing the Serbian republic veto regarding the adoption of a unified law on the state court without subdividing Bosnia and Herzegovina further? Is there a workaround? There is also the issue of discrimination against ethnic minorities in terms of the European Convention on Human Rights. How close is Bosnia and Herzegovina to meeting those challenges? I will continue to ask my questions and then come back.

Macedonia is the lead candidate at this stage and the hope is the accession will take place in the next couple of years. I have a devil's advocate question related to the fact that it is small country with a population of 600,000. The European Union is very bureaucratic. Does Macedonia have enough qualified officials to implement everything? Given that it has opened all of the 33 negotiating chapters and has closed 18 it is getting there, but it takes a lot of people power. It is a fair comment to make that it is a big burden on a small country and different from the days of Luxembourg being a founder member of the old community.

My final question is for deputy director Prangoski. I mentioned at the outset the issue of other EU countries interfering. Bulgaria would say it is legitimately interfering, no more than Greece would put that point forward in different debates. I am not talking about the rights and wrongs of it but North Macedonia does have the Bulgarian amendments to fix before it can move forward. That requires a two-thirds majority. What is the risk that there will be successive elections and populist campaigning because people do not like this imposition? As far as I know, North Macedonia wants to have everything teed up but not to implement until it is closer to EU integration, whereas the Bulgarians and European Commission want it to tick all the boxes first of all.

My second question relates to the anti-corruption element where it has been suggested that North Macedonia has not done enough to protect the judiciary from political interference, so one change of government and the judiciary could be affected. We have that with countries inside the European Union, Hungary being a case in point, but what protections are being put in place?

Ghlac an Teachta Seán Crowe an Chathaoir.

Deputy Seán Crowe took the Chair.

H.E. Mr. Osman Topčagić

The Deputy raised important questions. I will not go back to the role of the European Union during the conflict in the former Yugoslavia and specifically its failure to prevent war and what happened in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The process in Bosnia and Herzegovina after the war and specifically activities connected with the European integration process are happening in parallel with all activities connected with post-conflict resolution, which is not a typical situation for countries joining the European Union.

There was a question of how to approach that. We hope that the two processes - state-building, post-conflict resolution and reconciliation, and the European integration process - can go in parallel each enabling and encouraging the other. When we make progress on state-building, that qualifies as progress towards European integration. When we make steps forward in European integration, that creates more confidence among actors in the country, more recognition of the benefits of moving forward in that process, hopefully enabling willingness for new steps and new reforms as necessary.

That was happening in one period but maybe some of those who were opposed to the progress and to the peace agreement at the end, and there are such, were threatened by such positive development. I do not exclude also influence from abroad in developing and encouraging such thinking and actions within Bosnia and Herzegovina. At the moment we still have blockades of institutions, which I mentioned earlier, and blockades of adoption of a reform agenda, specifically the law and the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Another one is law and judicial and prosecutorial counsel. These are conditions for opening of negotiations, together with appointing a chief negotiator, and are conditions for qualifying for big money from European funds. Unfortunately, the country is not using this because of lack of agreement on such reforms.

Ms Nataša Jovović

I thank the Deputy very much for his question. It is a rightful one on the real constraints of the administrative capacities for a small country. Population-wise we are slightly bigger than the county of Cork, including Cork city. My opening speech was constrained to five minutes so I could not name all the institutions that we have been reorganising so far, or those we have been opening that are required by the closing benchmarks. Ireland's own experience of membership to transform the administration is one that we follow. We have very good co-operation and expertise that is being engaged through the Institute of Public Administration of Ireland that works also with the Regional School of Public Administration, ReSPA, which is based in Montenegro. Out of the 97 final benchmarks, 40 focus on administrative capacity. We have prepared an analysis of the current situation. We have identified the gaps and the shortcomings in order to find proper modalities to strengthen services, to modernise public administration and to uphold the principles of professionalism and expertise.

I would also like to mention here, as already said in the opening statement, that a June package - the proposal of the European Commission also exists - so that we can move from the pre-accession to internal funds without disruption, which is results-based and on the same terms as other member states.

Mr. Mile Prangoski

In response to the questions of the distinguished Member, and on the question on Bulgaria, we are actively trying to pursue dialogue directly with Bulgaria, as well as co-ordinating with other EU partners to overcome the issue in a sustainable manner. The key for us, as I touched upon in the opening statement, is to have a process that will remain fair, predictable and free from identity-based and history-based conditionality. This element is particularly important in the context of the constitutional amendments that the Member mentioned, given the fact that this represents a serious and politically sensitive step. Our objective, which we should never forget, is not merely to move to the next phase of the process but to ensure that the process itself is credible and genuinely capable of leading us to EU membership. In this regard we are trying to find safeguards that will make sure the process is, in a way, protected from an open-ended sequence of new bilateral conditions as we go along the way.

On the second question, anti-corruption - and the Judiciary in general - is probably the key issue in our rule of law file. We are very conscious that the public trust and the public confidence is especially key in this regard. Our approach so far has been to address this issue through first of all trying to establish the strongest independent institutions as possible but also to have clear rules and safeguards for both independence and accountability of the Judiciary. In this regard, I can share that the Government has proposed and the Parliament has adopted a new law on the Judicial Council that strengthens the transparency and the merit-based decision making in the selection and evaluation of judges. We are also implementing a dedicated anti-corruption action plan for the Judiciary, together with greater digitalisation and electronic case allocation to reduce discretion and external interference. We are completely aware that this legislation on its own is not enough. The real test for us is implementation, not only us but for all candidates, and building a credible track record. We are trying to set the system that will improve implementation in the Judiciary as well. I thank the Chair and I remain at his disposal if there are any follow-up questions.

An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Seán Crowe)

I thank the witnesses. We will now go to Deputy Robert O'Donoghue.

Deputy Robert O'Donoghue

I echo the Chair's statement in welcoming the expansion of the EU bloc being back on the full agenda as we have always been supporters of the merit-based accession system, as Ms Jovović referred to. I am very cognisant that the witnesses' three countries are at very different stages of the accession process so, generally speaking, I am looking to see what they think specifically we might be able to do for them as a member state during our Presidency, given that we have about three months left, realistically speaking, or are about 50% of the way through.

The ambassador, H. E. Mr. Topčagić, mentioned security in the Western Balkans at the end of his statement. How does Bosnia and Herzegovina assess the relationship between progress towards EU membership and the long-term political and security stability within the western Balkans? The ambassador has touched quite a bit on this before but perhaps he could flesh that out a bit more, which would be great.

In her opening statement, Ms Jovović said that 18 of the negotiating chapters are closed to date. Does Ms Jovović think it is realistic that by the end of the year Montenegro could get them all closed? It would be fantastic if it is, just given the tight timeline.

North Macedonia is participating in the reform and growth facility, and it has begun to benefit from integration into the likes of CEPA, as the deputy director, Mr. Prangoski, mentioned in his statement. How important are these forms of gradual integration in demonstrating the practical benefits of EU membership to the people in his country, while negotiations continue?

H.E. Mr. Osman Topčagić

I can say that the European integration process is still supported by a big majority of population in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

It is probable that this majority is not equally distributed geographically or administratively. Even now after all that has happened, we generally have more than 70% support for the European integration process. People see the process as a guarantee of peace, stability and economic prosperity. The European Union was established as a peace project on the European Continent. I think it is a commonly held opinion that the EU is the most successful such project and we want to be part of it. That is the power of the EU. There is an opportunity for the EU to exercise such powers and attractiveness in the region. Generally, this is the region which many identify as the backyard of the European Union. The question is how the European Union can be accepted as a major player in other parts of the world if there is no proper progress and success in the part of the European Continent that stretches as far as the Balkan Sea.

In many aspects, all countries have achieved a certain level of integration in different EU sectors or policies. An energy community has been created. The European Union was interested and we were interested in working together in the transport community, the civil aviation sector and a number of other sectors. I think is the most important is people-to-people contacts. The EU membership of Croatia, with which Bosnia and Herzegovina has a border of nearly 1,000 km, enables direct contacts and influence with the European Union's concepts, ideas, experiences and benefits to be shared across the border. As we struggle to move forward towards the European Union, the European Union is entering our territory and among our population. I believe that the European Union can still guarantee positive developments and stability in the region, and prevent the negative influence of other major players. We are all aware of their activities and attempts to spread their ideas in the region.

Ms Nataša Jovoviæ

As members can imagine, we have opened all 33 chapters and closed 18, which is more than half of the whole framework. Montenegro has already sent to the Commission nine negotiating positions for a further nine chapters, and the remaining six will be sent in the next fortnight. The very fact that the ad hoc working group on the treaty was established is a concrete and tangible example that we are moving from a political ambition to institutional reality. We have adopted more than 150 laws this year to align with the acquis so we think it is realistic to close the chapters. We are delivering on our results. I repeat that we want our delivery met by delivery by the European Union. We think this would demonstrate to the other candidate countries that when a country delivers and provide concrete results, it will achieve progress.

Mr. Mile Prangoski

How important are gradual integration and practical benefits? There are very important for several reasons. One is the direct input they would have on our citizens and businesses because they are immediately felt by them. Plus, they would help to maintain a high level of confidence and improve the perception about the process in general. Our citizens and businesses then can see that integration produces something tangible which is directly felt in their daily lives. They are also important at an institutional level. I think the other representatives of the western Balkans will agree with this. Once we are ready and show a high level of preparedness and delivery in one area, it will be logical for the EU to involve us as much and as deep as possible, and to get us around the table in the common foreign and security policy areas, for example, where we as a country maintain a perfect 100% file. We are also a NATO member. Therefore, it would make a lot of sense to involve the countries as much as possible within the areas where they have a high level of performance. At the same time, our position on gradual integration has been very clear: gradual integration should be pursued much more ambitiously by the EU but as a complementary process to accession itself and not as an alternative. Its purpose should be to prepare us to get ready faster and sooner for membership, and bring the benefits to the citizens before the date of accession. It is a good instrument to move away from the zero-sum philosophy that some argue for - it currently dominates the accession process - as this would mean that a country receives the benefits once it finally becomes a member.

Ghlac an Teachta Barry Ward an Chathaoir arís.

Deputy Barry Ward resumed the Chair.

An Cathaoirleach

Is everyone happy enough? Great. I thank everyone and I thank Deputy Crowe for his facilitation. Senator O'Loughlin is next.

Senator Fiona O'Loughlin

I would like to add my voice to the welcome extended to our distinguished guests. As a country, Ireland well knows the benefits of EU membership. We have demonstrated in the past that we are very open to and supportive of EU enlargement. Earlier this year, this committee had an engagement with Commissioner Kos. At that meeting she described enlargement as "a geopolitical necessity", with which we agree because we are at a crossroads in terms of where we go next as a community. At the same meeting, the Commissioner clearly made the point that it has to be "merit based", with which we agree. The Commissioner also pointed out that Europe needs to be ready to match that and ensure there is an adequate response when the necessary reforms are made.

Three or four years ago, I did some election monitoring in Montenegro, where I got a sense from everybody I spoke to that there was a huge sense of engagement and excitement about the possibility and potential of joining the EU, and a feeling that it was getting close.

I have also had an opportunity to visit North Macedonia. While I could see that North Macedonia was on the path, I felt that some challenges remained. I echo my colleague's statement that people should be conscious that the three different countries are on different paths and have reached different stages on their paths. I still think it is important to have the conversations because everybody can learn from one another.

I have two main questions, bearing in mind everything that has been discussed. One of the witnesses spoke about a challenge in their opening statement. I refer to the whole challenge of keeping the public interested and confident that this is going to happen. I ask the witnesses to address how that is in their countries because it is so important.

Bearing in mind they are at different stages, what are the biggest challenges at this point for the chapters they are dealing with?

H.E. Mr. Osman Topčagić

For us, the main issue is internal agreement. I remember in the beginning of this process a colleague from Slovenia told us that it is easier to negotiate with the European Union. The most difficult are internal negotiations to reach agreement and fulfil conditions to move forward towards membership. The issues we are faced with are connected with adoption of those two laws and similar issues. That is something the country needs regardless of the European integration process. It is not something that is strictly or only connected with the European Union or progress in this process. It is something the country needs by itself. That is the challenge we are faced with, hopefully with some positive involvement from international representatives after the elections we will have on 4 October with the formation of a new presidency, new parliament and a new government in Bosnia and Herzegovina. We may have a new situation and willingness to address those issues and find a joint interest to move forward. The benefits of progress towards membership of the European Union are evident but are not so visibly attractive for the population as was the case with getting visa-free movement for Schengen free states. Generally, access to funds is a benefit for people, companies and the country as a whole. Progress creates a new atmosphere, a new willingness and a new hope among the population. Certainly, agreement and movement in this process would be welcome and positive. That is the situation at the moment.

An Cathaoirleach

Do other witnesses want to come in?

Ms Nataša Jovović

In some areas Montenegro already behaves as a near member. We have had 100% alignment with the EU Common Foreign and Security Policy since day one of the negotiations. We have transposed it into our national system. We are also a NATO member. We use the euro and have become part of the single euro payment area. That is the practical proof that we can operate inside European frameworks before accession.

Public support was mentioned. We have constantly had high public support for the process of European integration, and it remains stable at approximately 70%. It is also partly due to the inclusive negotiating process. Members of NGOs, parliament, civil society and academia participate in the working groups that are dealing with this. We were also asked about the challenges. I spoke about the administrative capacities and the help we are receiving from the Irish Institute of Public Administration. We are working with other member states and the European Union to develop programmes that will equip our public servants to be part of the administration once we join.

Mr. Mile Prangoski

With regard to public trust and keeping the public interested, it is quite challenging in our case. Despite the unusually long and troubled accession history we have had in the past 25 years, which included a name change in 2018 and 2019, we are still keeping the door open to talks. Having all of that in mind, our citizens have remained unusually euro-resilient, if I can put it in that way. Support is hovering at approximately 70%. This is support for the EU. However, there is nuance there. The trust that EU membership will ever materialise has dropped to approximately 30%. It is not a question or an issue or Euroscepticism. On the contrary, we are dominantly pro-European, but there is the challenge of Euro-pessimism. This is obviously something that affects domestic discourse. It also has to do with the presence of or having fertile ground for third party interference. It is not rare for the case of North Macedonia to be used by other actors to negatively affect the credibility of the European perspective for the entire region and wider. This is definitely a challenge. The second question was about what the biggest challenge is in our respective files. I touched on this a couple of times in my opening remarks. It is about having a process that is credible, predictable and that works. This is something of particular interest to us in North Macedonia.

Deputy Seán Crowe

I welcome all of the witnesses. I start with Bosnia. There has been a lot of talk about the role of the Office of the High Representative and whether it is compatible with accession. It can be hard from the outside to know how much of this is valid criticism or how much it might be part of a disinformation campaign by actors who may be pro-Russia, anti-EU or both, or coming from some other element. Will the witnesses walk us through some of the Bosnian Government's view of how the OHR might be part of the process? Will it be phased out once membership is acquired? There has also been some criticism of the post-Dayton constitutional framework and how it relies on ethno-federal power sharing. The European Court of Human Rights has described it as discriminatory. We have also seen that power-sharing based on ethnicity has been a key component in peace building contexts in the North of Ireland. Has that impacted or presented much difficulty with regard to the accession process for Bosnia?

I turn to Montenegro. One of the main obstacles identified in the accession process is supposedly the lack of an independent media regulator. Has progress been made towards solving this problem? Will the witnesses tell us a little about that? There has also been some friction in recent times with Croatia, which in the past has been a supporter of Montenegro joining the EU. Have the difficulties with their neighbour been overcome, or how would they see that friction being erased?

Is Ms Jovović confident that Montenegro will have closed all chapters in line with the 2026 deadline?

In relation to North Macedonia, in Ireland we probably do not immediately appreciate the strong feelings that Bulgaria has towards North Macedonia joining the EU, as we are quite removed from the region. I ask Mr. Prangoski to walk us through some of the main points of contention between Bulgaria and North Macedonia regarding the latter's ambitions to become a full EU member state. How can Ireland, as an EU member, assist in improving conditions between the two countries? Is Mr. Prangoski satisfied that bilateral conditions can be agreed between Bulgaria and North Macedonia alone, or would an intermediary help smooth matters over?

I understand that North Macedonia has had to endure significant constitutional changes in a relatively short period. As has been said, people might look back over the past 26 years and wonder why they have suffered all the pain and have not seen many gains. It is only right that the EU should understand the changes the Republic of North Macedonia has had to endure and seek to mediate if that is what the people of North Macedonia wish in relation to this tension.

H.E. Mr. Osman Topčagić

I thank the Deputy. He raised important issues regarding the Office of the High Representative, its role and powers, and the European integration process. That is the question I was faced with when I became director of the European integration directorate in 2003. Some ambassadors told me we could not move forward until we had a high representative, specifically one with board powers, which means powers to impose legislation or move elected officials who do not comply with the peace agreement. We raised the issue with the European Commission at that time, and we reached the agreement that Bosnia and Herzegovina could move forward and negotiate what at that time was an association agreement, implement it and so on, while having a high representative with board powers, providing that conditions for progress in this European integration process were not fulfilled by decisions of the high representative. That means necessary legislation for the adoption of laws or establishment of institutions needs to be done by domestic institutions through regular procedures. That is how we made progress at that time, in adopting 46 laws and establishing 20-plus institutions. It was done through proposals by the government that were adopted in parliament, with the help of the international community which provided technical assistance.

The presence of the High Representative with board powers is not an obstacle to the movement of the country in the European integration process. Unfortunately, in one period, an agreement reached with the European Commission was not passed to the successors of those officials of the European Commission. That created a lot of confusion, the consequences of which we feel until this day, and undermined the role of the High Representative in financing, staffing and so on. We need the High Representative until domestic institutions can take over the role. Specifically, there are conditions defined in the so-called 5 plus 2 agenda for closing down the Office of the High Representative. Once those conditions are met and the criteria fulfilled, the office will be closed, not before and not under pressure through lobbying or similar. Otherwise, the situation will not be good.

Regarding the ruling of the European Court of Human Rights, it started with the case when one Roma and one Jew applied to take part in the election to the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina and were denied by the authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina because our constitution and election law specifically stated that members of the Presidency should be one Bosniak, one Serb and one Croat. When these individuals applied as one Jew and one Roma, they were rejected. They went to Strasbourg and the court ruled on the so-called Sejdić and Finci v. Bosnia and Herzegovina case. That ruling needs to be implemented.

That challenge for a country which is multi-ethnic, and in which three major ethnic groups make up a big majority but where people who do not identify as or belong to any of those three major groups also live and who, according to the European Convention on Human Rights, should enjoy the same rights, is to find a compromise and a balance between the ethnic aspect and the civic citizenship aspect, so that all those who are living in the country and have citizenship have the same rights. That is the challenge. There have been attempts to resolve the situation but, unfortunately, no agreement has been so far reached.

From the side of the European Union, implementation of that specific ruling in the case of Sejdić and Finci was defined as a condition. There are other cases, of different variants, regarding Bosniaks and Croats exercising rights in Republika Srpska or Serbs exercising rights in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and so on. There are other rulings but this specific ruling was the first and pointed to that challenge.

Regarding individuals who are not members of the major ethnic groups, our constitution says Bosniaks, Serbs, Croats and others, and citizens, agree as follows. That is the preamble of the constitution which is used for interpretation of the constitution. It has specific meaning. The preamble always has specific meaning in all legal acts. There are three major ethnic groups and others, and citizens. How to implement that ruling and transform it into legislation and election law is still the challenge.

Ms Nataša Jovović

The Deputy mentioned relations in the region. Good neighbourly relations are one of the three main pillars of our foreign policy, along with joining the EU and being a credible NATO member. We pursue those relations with all our neighbours on the basis of equality, mutual respect and sovereignty. For us, Croatia is an ally. It is an EU member and we have its support for joining NATO and the EU, our European bid.

In terms of outstanding questions between us, we are committed to resolve them in good faith and through dialogue. There is a constant dialogue between the two ministries of foreign affairs. Different committees have been set up on both sides on different files. We believe that everything should be resolved, as I said, in good faith and on the basis of partnership and good relations in the region.

Montenegro is recognised in the region as a promoter of regional stability. This year, we are presiding over the Berlin process, which is an important regional initiative. In October we will have the summit of the leaders of this initiative. We already hosted meetings of interior ministers, economy ministers and ministers of foreign affairs. This is a very important platform for us that helps countries of the region to join the EU.

It helps them on their European path. The Deputy talked also about the media. The media is especially important in these times when we see hybrid threats, not only in Montenegro but also in a wider European context. There is a lot of disinformation, especially as we are moving closer to the EU and having the elections next year. These hybrid threats might be even more pronounced. That is why what we are doing with regard to Chapters 23 and 20, which deal with media literacy and enhancing our capacities in the cyber domain, is very important. It is not only accession work. It is security policy. Montenegro hosts a regional centre for cybersecurity in the context of which we have opened co-operation with France and Slovenia. This year, it became an international organisation. As a result, we are not only observing capacities, we are also contributing to improving and strengthening capacities.

Mr. Mile Prangoski

The essence of the position has to do with history. It has to do with highly sensitive questions concerning interpretations of a history that we as two neighbouring nations share and of historical figures and events. It has to do with language issues and other minority-related issues. This broader position and these questions are not to be neglected. They should be discussed between neighbouring states, but we believe that they should not and cannot be presented as formal conditions in the EU accession process. This is key concern of ours relating to having a process that is predictable and that leads to concrete results in the accession. The immediate formal request is having the constitutional change done. However, there is a risk that once we do the constitutional change, another set of conditions will be delivered and tied to the European integration process, meaning that our accession to the EU would be constantly conditioned by bilateral demands coming from Sofia. There is definitely a need for more engagement and facilitation on the part of the EU, which should help both sides to build trust and confidence and ensure that the European nature of the accession process remains clear and credible.

In terms of what Ireland can do during its Presidency, in general, the possibilities are limited with regard to having three more months to go and being in the position of honest broker. We have no illusions there. In general, some parallels can be drawn with the Good Friday Agreement, another very difficult and protracted issue, which, as I see it, was only possible to overcome after the two countries became part of it. The message is that some of the issues that have to do with identity, history, etc., take time. They take a forward-looking framework - a common framework of co-operation, understanding and a situation where the conditions are right to discuss these sort of issues in a different manner and not as a demand tied to the EU accession process of one's neighbouring candidate country.

Deputy Eamon Scanlon

I thank everybody for the presentations. There is no doubt that many questions have been answered. I have two questions. The first involves what specific progress Bosnia and Herzegovina hopes to see during Ireland's EU Presidency. Where could Irish political and technical support make the greatest difference? Are there particular areas in which Bosnia and Herzegovina would welcome greater Irish capacity-building and expertise in preparing institutions for EU membership.

H.E. Mr. Osman Topčagić

Could the Deputy repeat the question?

Deputy Eamon Scanlon

What specific progress would Bosnia and Herzegovina hope to see during Ireland's EU Presidency and where could Irish political and technical support make the greatest difference? That was the first question. Second, are there particular areas where Bosnia and Herzegovina would welcome greater Irish capacity-building and our expertise in preparing institutions for EU membership? The basic question is whether Ireland can do more to help Bosnia and Herzegovina. How could Ireland assist to clear the road for EU membership in view of the fact that we have the Presidency for six months, although we are three months in? Is there anything we could do to support Bosnia and Herzegovina in its endeavours?

H.E. Mr. Osman Topčagić

I thank the Deputy for his question and his willingness to support us in this process, but I am afraid I am not in position to answer directly today. I will pass the question to my colleagues in the Directorate for European Integration and see what kind of assistance it and other institutions in Bosnia and Herzegovina may need to make them better qualified for the next steps in the European integration process. Technical assistance is always needed and the experience of other countries is always welcome. Support is needed, so I hope we shall find some common areas in respect of which Ireland can help with regard to how the instruments of the EU take in others that can be used in that framework.

An Cathaoirleach

I assume the question applies to each of the three countries.

Ms Nataša Jovović

Ireland has constantly helped Montenegro in its European integration process. This is nothing new. It is an historic choice for Montenegro. We have just celebrated 20 years of our renewed independence and ever since the beginning, we have declared EU membership as one of our main goals so we welcome all the help Ireland has provided. There is constant communication between our ministry of European affairs and the institutions and Ministries in Ireland. They have been exchanging the information such as what is needed and in which areas of the reforms that we are undertaking. We ask this committee to keep enlargement on its agenda, to support the accession treaty for Montenegro and, when the time comes, to ratify Montenegro's accession to the EU.

Mr. Mile Prangoski

To echo what my colleagues said, I once again extend our appreciation for Ireland's consistent and continued support for North Macedonia's EU accession path and for the region in general. I ask Ireland to keep up the work and to stay as vocal as possible in defence of the values surrounding EU enlargement in terms of the process itself, in terms of merit and in terms of having a European nature of the accession as the main legal progress. We have had very good co-operation with Ireland on all levels, not only on the highest level but also on the working level. Ireland's ambassador in Bucharest, who covers North Macedonia as well, has been very active with Ireland's Ministry and in Brussels through Ireland's permanent representation there and the colleagues there. We would appreciate it if this dialogue were to continue in the months to come.

An Cathaoirleach

Thank you, Mr. Prangoski. We have covered a lot of material. Unless anybody wants to come in again, we have detained our guests for a long time. I express my gratitude to you. I know the preparation that goes into a meeting like this and I thank you for all the information you have provided us with. I reiterate that, for us, enlargement is an important part of the values pillar that has been set out as a priority in our Presidency. As I said at the outset, we have got so much from membership of the European Union that we want that to be available to any state that makes the criteria, obviously, and that is genuinely interested in being a member of the European Union. It is appropriate to acknowledge the work that has been done by all three countries that have appeared before the committee today in terms of meeting the Copenhagen criteria and responding to requests and, dare I say, demands from the Commission in relation to different criteria. I know it is an arduous road. I hope it is a worthwhile exercise and I hope it will be completed for all of you as soon as it possibly can be. As I said, any interaction I have had with our Ministers has been to the effect that they want to accelerate this as much as possible in line with the criteria. We all wish you the very best of luck, and I thank you all, Ambassador Topčagić, Ms Jovović and Mr. Prangoski, for your attendance today. I hope I did a better job pronouncing those names this time than I did the first time. I apologise again and thank you.

I propose that we suspend for a couple of minutes before we go into private session to discuss matters pertaining to the committee. We will adjourn after that. Our next public meeting will be on Wednesday, 14 October 2026. Are we agreed to suspend? Agreed.

Cuireadh an suí ar fionraí ar 5.14 p.m. agus cuireadh tús leis arís i seisiúin príobháideach ar 5.20 p.m.

Sitting suspended at 5.14 p.m. and resumed in private session at 5.20 p.m.

Cuireadh an comhchoiste ar athló ar 5.55 p.m. go dtí 3.30 p.m. Dé Céadaoin, an 14 Deireadh Fómhair 2026.

The joint committee adjourned at 5.55 p.m. until 3.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 14 October 2026.

• Back to table of contents