The highest judicial body in Bosnia and Herzegovina has not respected the previous agreement or warnings, which is why the European Union is currently considering its future funding for the process of monitoring the assets of judges and prosecutors, it was confirmed for Detektor.
This decision by one of the largest donors to the domestic judiciary comes after the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council (HJPC) changed the way external experts are engaged to monitor the assets of judges and prosecutors, the EU Delegation to BiH confirmed.
The Delegation said that earlier this year the HJPC considered draft amendments to the rulebook, which would fundamentally change the framework on which external monitoring of the assets of judges and prosecutors is based and would pose a serious risk of rendering the external monitoring program ineffective. The draft amendments, they say, have raised a number of concerns regarding the efficiency, credibility and independence of external monitoring.
These concerns, they add, were officially raised by Valentina Superti, Director for the Western Balkans in the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Neighbourhood and Enlargement Negotiations, in her letters to HJPC President Sanin Bogunić dated 10 February and 13 April.
Despite this, according to the EU, the HJPC BiH nevertheless adopted the relevant amendments to the rulebook on 15 April, essentially disregarding the Commission’s opinion.
– We are currently assessing our course of action, including any impact on EU funding of the monitoring operation – the EU Delegation confirmed to Detektor.
The introduction of asset verification of judges and prosecutors through amendments to the Law on the HJPC was crucial for BiH in obtaining candidate status for EU membership. The adoption of the new law is still considered one of the most important for continuing the European path.
On Wednesday, the High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council adopted amendments to the rulebook in its session in the part relating to external monitoring of the Department for Asset Verification of Judicial Office Holders and the manner of engaging external experts to monitor their work. The Council members decided that external experts would be selected through a public competition, and two members of the commissions would be appointed by the European Union and one by the HJPC.
The Council members made this decision without consulting the EU and it is different from the previous agreement, the Delegation of the European Union to BiH confirmed to Detektor.
As they state, the European Commission’s support for the implementation of the integrity amendments is reflected in the EU-funded external monitoring programme, which monitors the work and overall functioning of the HJPC’s Department for Asset and Interest Reporting, as well as disciplinary proceedings. Specific implementation modalities were agreed with the HJPC, which envisaged the recruitment of external experts and their support staff through an open, transparent procedure based on the candidates’ expertise.
All changes to the established modalities should be mutually agreed between the HJPC and the European Commission, the Delegation stated in its response.
The HJPC and the EU have been at odds for several months over the engagement and work of external experts who should help ensure that the verification of assets of judges and prosecutors, which is being carried out in this way by the domestic judiciary for the first time, is carried out efficiently and transparently. Members of the Council had previously rejected the proposal of the EU experts, which is funding this process.
After that, the HJPC began changing the rules for their engagement.
On the first day of the HJPC session this week, the Department for Legal Affairs presented a summary of the Council’s proposal and the European Commission’s response, stating that the Council’s proposal was to conduct the engagement procedure based on a public call published by the Council with the formation of a committee, but that they received a response from the European Commission that they did not agree with that proposal because they believe that the Council should not select experts in the manner proposed in order to avoid a perceived or real conflict of interest.
Brussels stated, as explained, that the Council’s role should be limited to checking whether the expert being selected meets the minimum qualifications.
In a statement, the HJPC stated that it had decided that in the committees for the selection of experts for external monitoring, the majority of the composition of the selection committee would be members selected by the international partner – the EU, “which further confirms the Council’s unquestionable commitment to creating a perception of the complete independence of the experts for the external monitoring of the Department’s work”.
Since July 2025, the work of external experts has been funded by the European Union. External experts are mandated to monitor disciplinary proceedings arising from property and interest procedures, but do not make suggestions on final decisions.
External experts warn in a new report that the Department for Verification of Property of Judges and Prosecutors continues to operate with insufficient capacity, and the refusal of household members to provide data and limited international cooperation are slowing down the work, calling into question the ability to process all reports within the deadlines, BIRN BiH reports.
