On 22 July 2021 EMA in cooperation with Ministry of Finance and Economy, SFPA and GIZ Albania, organized the sessions under the Working Group V – that included chapter 1,3 and 20. This sessions came after the establishing of consultation tables for Chapter 1,3,20 and 28 of the European Integration Partnership Platform established by Prime Minister Order 113/2019 makes possible the involvement of civil society actors, the private sector, academia, social partners and other stakeholders in the accession negotiations process of Albania. Proceeding on this track, on July 22, 2021 four sessions were organized in accordance with Chapter 1, 3, 20 and 28 of the EU Acquis. These chapters are being coordinated by the Ministry of Finance and Economy.

Besart Kadia,Deputy Minister of Economy and Finance / Negotiator for chapter 1,3,20 and 28 welcomed the participants and highlighted the most important objectives of the agenda.  He stated that after 33 Discussion and Consultation Roundtables corresponding to the chapters of the European Union acquis have been established, the elected Governing Board will approve an official regulation to guide the work of the Partnership Platform members. The Deputy Minister acknowledged the valuable contribution of all the foreign experts and reaffirmed the dedication of the MFE to support all the initiatives that assist Albania to access EU.

Gledis Gjipali– EMA moderated the session and explained every point of the draft regulation.

• Point 1– concerns the purpose of Discussion and Consultation Roundtables which is to discuss, review, take positions and recommendations to the structures responsible for the European integration process
• Point 2– includes details about the arrangements of the roundtables such as time, place and agenda
• Point 3– states that the announcements should be done electronically at least 5 days before the meeting
• Point 4– clarifies that the Head of the Inter-Institutional Working Group chairs the Roundtable meeting, leads the discussions and ensures that everything goes according to the plan
• Point 5– The agreement of the positions and conclusions drawn on a case-by-case basis by the Roundtable is made by consensus. In case of no consensus on a specific issue, a vote is held by all members of the Roundtable.
• Point 6- Members who participate individually in the Roundtables may not delegate their participation to other individuals. The organizations and institutions must notify the change of representative at least 3 days before the meeting of the Roundtable.
• Point 7- The inter-institutional working group can accept or reject the applications for the new members that intend to join the roundtable.
• Point 8- Members of the Roundtable who do not attend 3 consecutive meetings for no reason, lose the right to be part of the roundtable.
• Point 9- the Secretariat of the Inter-Institutional Working Group for European Integration technically and administratively supports the work of the Roundtables.

The participants voted in favour of all the above-mentioned points.

Mrs. Natasa Dragojlovic, Coordinator of The National Convention on The European Union in Serbia expressed her delight to be part of this activity and mentioned an attempt to establish the Regional Convention on the European Integration gathering representatives from Albania, Serbia and Montenegro. She considered it a great opportunity to exchange views and strengthen cooperation before joining EU. Dragojlovic explained that in 2014 when Serbia opened the negotiations, the National Convention was re-established as a civil society platform advocation for EU integration. Apart from covering 35 negotiation chapters, the working groups covered cross-cutting topics such as the economic reform program, sustainable development, freedom of speech and the media, Berlin Process and the Political criteria. The findings and recommendations are regularly cited in the European Commission Country report and are used as a tool for assessing the quality of the reforms that the government undertakes regarding EU integration. She pointed out that the Working Groups meet regularly to maintain ongoing monitoring of the negotiation process and ensure that EU standards are properly implemented in Serbia. Dragojlovic spoke briefly about Chapter 1 (Free movement of goods) where Serbia received -two opening benchmarks in 2015, -the action plan for harmonization with article 34, 36 with timeframes for analytical review of domestic legislation and administrative practices. -A strategy and action plan with timeframes for the implementation of European legislation which contains plans for the implementation of the vertical and horizontal legislation in the field of standardization, accreditation, methodology and market surveillance. The consultation process with EU is still ongoing with several issues on this chapter.

Regarding Chapter 3 (Right of establishment and freedom to provide services) the benchmark stated that Serbia – needs to prepare a detailed strategy for alignment with the EU Acquis in the field of professional qualifications. This chapter has not been opened yet and one of the biggest obstacles is lack of a law on services.

Chapter 20 (Enterprise and Industrial Policy) has been opened in 2017 and to finalize the chapter Serbia -needs to draft and start the implementation of a comprehensive industrial strategy. The working group recommended -that the transparency of all legal entities needs to be increased and they should be involved in adoption of business regulations.

Dragojlovic said that Chapter 28 (Consumer Protection and Public Health) is relevant because it is directly connected with the lives of the citizens. There were no opening benchmarks for this chapter and further strengthening of institutional capacities and harmonization of domestic legislation was required. Lastly, she mentioned the Serbian National Convention’s appeal to EU institutions to include Western Balkans in the Conference of the Future of Europe.

Open discussion: There were a lot of questions about the materials that working groups review before giving their recommendations and the procedure that is followed.

Dragojlovic explained step by step the working procedure before giving the recommendations. She stated that they initially read and analyze the European Commission Country report. More than 760 civil society organizations part of the Convention, conduct their own analysis in different fields and put all those analytical results on the table for the working groups. The next step is to consult these findings with the representatives of the state institutions and leading ministries. In an inter-active manner, the policies are discussed and finally the recommendations are sent to the government, the parliament, EU and civil society organizations. Dragojlovic explained that they requested from the Chief Negotiator to clarify how the civil society can have access to all the documents that serve as a base for negotiations. Many of the organizations use the National Convention mechanism as a source of information for a direct dialogue with decision-makers. She mentioned that once a year they have a meeting with the president of the Republic and meetings with the Prime-Minister on the monthly basis regarding different topics.

Mr. Martin Vlachynsky, Institute of Economic and Social Studies in Slovakia (INESS) talked about the free movement of goods and the practices before and after EU accession. He started his presentation with a historical background of Slovakia’s economic situation before 1989 saying that the focus was on the heavy industry and private SMEs were non-existent. After 1990 there was a liberalization of market but after Czechoslovakia split, Slovakia went in a different direction and was called “the black hole in Europe” because of the political situation. A new government was elected in 1998(re-elected in 2002) and embarked a series of economic reforms: recapitalization and privatization of banking industry, simplification of tax laws, creation of private pension pillar, changes in labour code, and floating exchange rate. Vlachynsky explained the development of each chapter before the finalization stressing that agriculture remained an issue until the last moment. Concerning the free movement of workers. He said that some countries accepted Slovak workers and other introduced intermediate periods. On the other hand, industrial associations and other economic related stakeholders had a low analytical capacity. He explained that after 2004 there were massive foreign direct investments (FDI) and a strong GDP growth.  The stability of reforms after accession was not good because there was a weak rule of law, lack of reforms in the public sector, education healthcare etc. Furthermore, Vlachynsky analyzed the historic timeline of FDI and trade saying that Slovakia has had some competitive advantages (geography, wage skilled labour) whereas nowadays, there is a FDI slowdown, export concentration and rising share of non-EU trade partners.

Session 2: Explanation of Chapter 20 – Enterprise and industrial policy

Mr. Martin Vlachynsky, Institute of Economic and Social Studies in Slovakia (INESS) explained that accession ensures functioning market economies, removal of factors endangering functioning of the common market and adoption of harmonizing regulations and norms. He mentioned Slovakia’s challenges including difficulties administering the Acquis, deepening and extending the reform and transformation of the economy, reducing the high levels of unemployment and coping with all the challenges without jeopardizing the public support for enlargement. EU accession changed Slovakia’s industry from energy, textile, weapons to automotive and communication technologies. Small and mid-size enterprises (SMEs) have problems to compete in the open market and attract investors and have a burden of EU bureaucracy. EU accession did not help with a lot of agriculture problems because it failed to reform extremely fragmented land ownership and there were demotivational effects of direct payments. Vlachynsky pointed out that the economic convergence is ongoing, both in terms of GDP and living standards and that most parts of Slovak economy have been able to connect to global value chains. He added that the country remains decently attractive for FDI.

Open discussion: The participants asked for recommendations regarding the prioritization of the rural and industrial development.

Session 3: Explanation of Chapter 3 – Right of establishment and freedom to provide services

Mrs. Lucia Húšťavová, Ministry of Education, Science and Sports in Slovakia, Center for the Recognition of Diplomas and Qualifications talked about the right of establishment and freedom to provide services: role of the non-state actors on the rules and procedure for mutual recognition of qualifications. She explained that this right is guaranteed by the Treaty on Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The Professional Qualifications Directive (PQD) defines under what conditions may a member state limit the access to certain professions (services) by national law based on the qualifications of the professional. Húšťavová stated that in Slovakia there is an academic recognition (for continuation of studies or other purposes) and recognition of professional qualifications (for pursuit of regulated professions). She mentioned some of the challenges the country has faced in this field indicating that not every regulated profession that has a qualification requirement stipulated by national law is a regulated profession according to EU legislation and judicature. PQD compliance has to be ensured for all regulated professions and there are a few authorities for recognition. The Coordinator creates, maintains and updates the National Database of Regulated professions, provides and updates the information in the EU Database of Regulated professions, ensures compliance PQD and other EU laws. The Assistance Centre provides citizens, as well as assistance centers of the other Member States, with assistance concerning the recognition of professional qualifications (important tool for information exchange between Member States:  IMI system – Internal Market Information System). Húšťavová mentioned that the involved stakeholders can be national or European. Moreover, she explained several systems of recognition.

GS – General system of recognition (national law) – basis: comparability

AS – Automatic system of recognition (PQD) – basis: training coordination

AR – Acquired rights (PQD) – basis: existing rights plus professional experience

AS and AR concern the following sectoral professions: Doctor of Medicine, Nurse, Dental Practitioner, Pharmacist, Midwife, Architect, Veterinary Surgeon.

She emphasized that before any adoption or change of regulation, the lawmaker has to prove its proportionality. When it comes to accreditation Húšťavová explained:

AS: the member state defines the qualification(s) (name of documents) possessed by the professionals who completed training that fulfils all PQD requirements (number of hours/credits, curriculum) after the reference date of harmonization, the entry may contain general statement (issued by: A University) or concrete institutions

AR: accreditation is not checked as long as the professional can prove the right to practice in the home member state and the minimum required professional experience

GS: since GS is subject to national law, member states may require the accreditation of the institution or program when recognizing under general system

In Slovakia: Qualification is a higher education diploma, graduate diploma, secondary school leaving certificate or certificate of final examinations issued by a recognized education institution according to the legislation of a member state or a third state.

She clarified that the functioning system of quality assurance (accreditation) may still be required by other legal documents, for example in the area of Higher Education.

Conclusion remarks have been made by the members of consultation tables and MFE representatives.