The insufficient capacity and efficiency of Croatia's judiciary system, the continued urgency of full cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the border dispute with Slovenia are the most serious obstacles to the country's progress in its EU accession talks. In an interview with Europolitics, Ivan Simonovic, Croatia's justice minister, explains the steps Croatia has been taking to resolve these problems. He believes that the concerns regarding Croatia's cooperation with the ICTY will be successfully addressed by the middle of February. As for the border dispute with Slovenia, he expresses Croatia's readiness to provide Ljubljana with all necessary guarantees concerning its free access to the Adriatic high waters, regardless of the court's legal decision. At the same time, he warns Slovenia against misusing its dominant position to force Croatia to change its border. According to Simonovic, such an attempt could set a very dangerous precedent for the Western Balkans region.

Will Croatia be ready to open chapter 23 covering judiciary and fundamental rights in the first half of 2009?

I'm very glad that it is the impression of both the Commission and the European Parliament that the organisational and legislative changes we have introduced were appropriate. They now need to be tested. I'm sure that they will work in practice and the justice system will not be an obstacle to EU accession anymore. The remaining bumps on the road are certain aspects of Croatia's cooperation with the ICTY and the blockage of negotiations by Slovenia over the border dispute.

 What steps has Croatia taken to satisfy the requirement of the ICTY's Chief Prosecutor, Serge Brammertz, concerning certain documents on the war activities of General Ante Gotovina, who is being tried for war crimes committed against Serbs during Zagreb's 1995 operation Storm [see Europolitics 3690]?

In all other matters, we cooperate fruitfully with the ICTY. The only problem that existed between our government and Prosecutor Brammertz was related to the Gotovina case. In this respect, we satisfied all Brammertz's requests concerning police documents. The problem remains with some military documents that the prosecutor finds very important. On what Brammertz insists is the clarification on whether these documents existed or not and if they can be delivered to the tribunal. It is beyond any doubt that what is available to the government will be submitted to Brammertz. Moreover, Brammertz requires Croatia to establish a chain of custody for the missing documents. The last person in this chain will have to either return the documents or face legal consequences. I hope we will have this clarification by 15 February. I sincerely hope that this problem will soon be off the table.

How many documents are missing?

Mr Brammertz is speaking about 33 documents that he finds particularly important. We will verify each of them and the detailed list will be handed over to Mr Brammertz.

How are you going to convince the EU member states that what you had done was everything you were able to do?

The problem results from the lack of clarification. I hope that when the ambiguity is eliminated the current concerns will disappear.

What is the way out from the current deadlock in the efforts to settle the border dispute with Slovenia?

The way out, I think, is that Croatia gives Slovenia certain political guarantees that their concerns will be met no matter what the court decides on the future border. We can not accept establishing borders through political pressure rather than law. But at the same time we understand that Slovenia is concerned. It needs therefore to be clarified that there will be no obstruction of Slovenia's access to the high waters no matter what the court decision will be. Croatia is obliged by international law and is also willing to give Slovenia assurances that it will have absolutely non-restricted access to the high seas through Croatia's territorial waters. The problem of access to the high seas should not be an obstacle. Let's take the example of the port in Antwerp. To access it, you have to go through the territorial waters of the Netherlands.

How close are you to this agreement?

Unfortunately, we are too far. However, I hope that soon Slovenia will be convinced by both Croatia and the EU member states to accept the guarantees we are ready to offer.

Is the Croatian government working now on the list of those guarantees?

Slovenia is the one that has to say what it wants first. I can say at the moment that it is unreasonable to ask for the change of borders by requesting Croatia to give away part of its territory. I think the way out is that Slovenia - without territorial changes - gets certain assurances. And we think that the mediation by the EU – the Commission or any other body – in this respect is necessary. But not a mediation resulting in deciding on the final border. Rather mediation seeking ways to ensure Slovenia that its concerns will be met.

What's your reaction to the idea that the mediation will be carried out by a group of EU experts?

We welcome this. But what we will not accept is for this group to decide on the location of the border in an attempt to accommodate Slovenia's ambitions. It must be a legal solution.

It seems, however, that Slovenia is reluctant to refer the case to the international court. Are you ready to back down and resign from a legal procedure?

We are ready to give political assurances. But we are not ready to make political decisions concerning the border changes. This is absolutely unacceptable. According to international practice, when you have a conflict, there are two ways to solve it – one is a compromise, the other one is an imposed solution. The elimination of the latter case through the introduction of legal proceedings was a great achievement in the history of international relations.

Is Slovenia trying to use the second option and impose a solution?

This is an attempt to turn the wheel of history back and to use political domination instead of international legal procedure. This is unacceptable not only to Croatia but also to Europe. We are ready to meet Slovenia's concerns by providing guarantees going beyond the provisions of international law but we can not accept that political aspirations to change the borders through blackmail are recognised as something legitimate. Theoretically, you can ask why Croatia would not accept a minor border change. But in not such a distant history we had situations showing that the attempts to change borders in Yugoslavia through domination were causes of very bloody conflicts. What also needs to be considered is the danger which such a precedent could create for the whole region, including such countries as Serbia and Macedonia.

Could you briefly sum up progress in the reform of the judicial system and the fight against organised crime and corruption since the Commission's last progress report issued in November 2008?

We have established a very powerful system of prevention and fight against corruption and organised crime. It consists of specialised police forces, a special department at the state attorney's office and specialised court councils. The latter will be operational in ten days. So, now we have a highly specialised vertically integrated system. People who are selected to work for these institutions have to pass special security checks. It is the most thorough security check that exists under Croatian law. Their salaries are also some 50% higher than average.

Secondly, we have introduced two major legal changes. We have amended our criminal law by introducing Article 82, which says that the property of a person who is convicted on corruption or organised crime charges can be confiscated. The same article says that if a prosecutor can prove that the illegally acquired property was transferred to a third person, the property in question can be confiscated. The second change provides for much a more active role of the police investigator and the prosecutor.

Is this system working already?

We will establish the specialised court councils in ten days. So, it's nearly working. The police forces are already working, and so are the prosecutors.

Has the recent case of the mafia-style killing of 26-year-old Ivana Hodak, the daughter of a well-known Croat lawyer that raised concerns in the EU, been solved?

It was solved last October(*). It turned out that Ivana Hodak was assassinated by a homeless person who had a personal vendetta against her farther. The investigation proved that it was not an organised crime-related murder. We have developed a very powerful system since the assassination took place. Our system is more effective than that of a number of European countries. At the same time, we have fewer cases of organised crime than other European countries. Nevertheless, we can also use that tool in the fight against corruption.

What progress has been achieved in solving the backlog of pending cases?

Substantial progress has been achieved. We have been cutting the backlog by 8% yearly for the last two years. I expect even better results this year because we have changed the law on civil, criminal and administrative procedures as well as the law on enforcement. All these laws were changed in accordance with the best European practices in order to accelerate the judicial proceedings. Secondly, we introduced an effective system of pressure on the court presidents. If we have a court where the situation with regard to a backlog does not improve, the president gets a 'red card'. Three court presidents have already been dismissed due mainly to their lack of managerial skills.