Europos Parlamento narės Laimos Andrikienės kalba EP Tarptautinės prekybos komiteto posėdyje, sausio 22 d. Briuselyje, bendroje diskusijoje dėl ES asociacijos susitarimo įgyvendinimo su Moldova, Gruzija ir Ukraina:
I would like to comment on two countries, Georgia first and then Moldova.
On Georgia: We have to congratulate Georgia for the progress it is doing in the implementation of the Association Agreement. Georgia is the undisputed exemplar in the Eastern Partnership. It is certainly the success story comparing with Moldova or Ukraine in this regard. The country has made a significant progress on poverty reduction, fighting inequality due to successful reforms of social security system, as well as in agriculture and energy fields.
Reforms in fighting corruption are on the right track, however more efforts should be done to implement important legislative acts such as Anti-Corruption Strategy and Action Plan.
The most problematic area remains judiciary as it is used as political tools with rather limited independence. It is important that Georgia continues taking steps to strengthen judicial independence, to increase the efficiency, impartiality and professionalism of the judiciary, as well as to ensure the right to a fair trial.
Media independence should be strengthened in order decrease political interference in Georgia’s media market.
Reorientation of Georgia’s economy towards the EU is ongoing but not as fast as it could have been expected. Farmers and other economic stakeholders are not fully aware of benefits and costs of the DCFTA. Therefore, the EU should develop a public awareness campaign to promote the DCFTA and encourage all stakeholders to fully participate.
Briefly on Moldova: The Association Agreement between the EU and Moldova encourages domestic reforms aimed at the consolidation and effectiveness of democratic institutions and the rule of law. What is important to mention, Moldova has made progress on technical elements of the implementation, though sensitive political reforms, which require political will have been delayed or only partly implemented. Core challenges, which remain are Moldova’s excessive politicisation of state institutions, systemic corruption, lack of judicial independence, poor financial sector governance.
As I see the situation in that country, corruption is the main cause of the deep political and social-economic crises in Moldova. It is impeding the economic recovery and is crippling the potential development of the country.
The EU must consistently request the Moldovan authorities to ensure stricter oversight over the financial and technical assistance provided for the implementation of reforms under the Association Agreement.
And given the concerns about Moldova slipping away from its commitments under the Association Agreement, the EU should increase its support for a strong and independent civil society and media freedom, as it is imperative not only for holding the national government to account, but also for upholding European values and vindicating Moldova’s European path.
Finally, expanding additional multi-year zero export tariff quotas should also be considered as it would support the modernisation of various sectors of Moldova’s economy, including industry, that are not ready to compete on the EU market.