Abstract

ABSTRACT Extensive reforms were undertaken to tackle the inefficiencies in judiciary in the Southeast European country of North Macedonia. The EU asked North Macedonia, as a candidate country for EU membership, to undertake intensive judiciary reforms. However, these reforms were not sufficient to eradicate and prevent patronage practices regarding the judiciary by the ruling political parties. Instead, contestation accompanied judiciary reforms. This article examines how the politics of patronage emerged and progressed and argues that it is possible to identify a quiet take-over of the judiciary by the executive. What is distinctive about North Macedonia is the failure of the reforms to constrain the ability of the ruling majorities to penetrate the judiciary. The result has been a patronage over and capture of the judiciary. This study demonstrates that there was informal resistance and failure to ensure internalization of EU judiciary norms.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.