The European Union has begun discussing tougher safeguards for future member states, with Montenegro emerging as the first country likely to face the proposed rules in its accession treaty. The measures could include a probation period of up to 15 years, expanded monitoring before membership and, in the most serious cases, suspension of voting rights.
The talks are still at an early stage. EU ambassadors reviewed draft legal provisions prepared by the European Commission, but member states remain divided over how strict the safeguards should be and how much power the Commission should have to activate them.
Why the EU is considering new enlargement safeguards
The European Commission has proposed the changes as part of a broader effort to prepare the EU for future enlargement. The proposals are intended to protect the rule of law and the functioning of EU institutions after a candidate country becomes a member.
Montenegro is considered the leading candidate in the current enlargement process and could become the first country to have the new arrangements included in its accession treaty. However, the country has not yet joined the EU, and the discussions do not represent a final decision on its membership or on the wording of the safeguards.
The debate reflects concerns that existing mechanisms may not provide enough protection if a new member later seriously breaches EU values, weakens judicial independence or fails to cooperate with other member states.
Proposed EU safeguards include voting-rights suspension
The most far-reaching proposal is an institutional safeguard clause covering serious breaches of fundamental EU values or the principle of sincere cooperation. In the most severe circumstances, the mechanism could allow the EU to suspend a new member’s voting rights.
Under the draft discussed by ambassadors:
- A safeguard could be activated in response to serious breaches of EU values.
- The affected country would have at least two weeks to submit observations after activation.
- A Commission proposal could take effect unless a qualified majority of member states rejected or amended it.
- The mechanism would operate alongside Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union, which addresses serious breaches of EU values.
Member states are still debating the exact measures that could be imposed, the legal relationship with Article 7 and whether the proposed process gives the European Commission too much authority.
Disagreement over a 15-year probation period
A central issue is the proposed 15-year limit for temporary safeguards after accession. Governments are divided over whether such a long period would be proportionate and whether it would create a permanent sense of conditional membership for new countries.
Countries associated with the Friends of the Western Balkans group, including Italy and Austria, have warned that excessively strict conditions could make enlargement more difficult. France and the Netherlands have pressed for stronger guarantees that future members will continue to respect the rule of law.
Monitoring would begin before membership
The Commission has also proposed a general monitoring clause covering the period between the signing of an accession treaty and the date a country formally joins the EU.
The draft framework could include:
- Regular reports on progress towards meeting membership requirements.
- Peer assessments by existing EU member states.
- Early-warning letters where concerns emerge.
- The possibility of postponing accession as a last resort.
Postponement could be considered if clear evidence showed that a candidate would not meet the conditions for membership on time. The decision-making process has not yet been settled, although the draft tentatively refers to a qualified-majority decision based on a Commission recommendation.
The length of any postponement would also need to be defined. A comparable safeguard appeared in the accession arrangements for Romania and Bulgaria, where postponement decisions normally required unanimity.
Other proposed changes to EU enlargement rules
The draft package contains several additional measures. One proposal would discourage member states from blocking enlargement decisions because of unresolved bilateral disputes with candidate countries. The Commission envisages addressing this issue through a declaration accompanying an accession treaty rather than through the main safeguard provisions.
Judicial cooperation could also be protected through temporary suspension of certain decisions or arrangements involving a country found to be in serious breach, while avoiding disruption to wider cooperation between national authorities.
Separate conditions would apply to a future country seeking to join the Schengen Area. These would include continued respect for the rule of law, anti-corruption standards, action against organised crime and an effective justice system. EU membership and Schengen participation are separate processes, so joining the Union would not automatically mean immediate entry into the passport-free area.
The draft also carries over economic safeguards used in Croatia’s accession treaty. These cover serious economic difficulties and breaches of internal market rules. The Commission has proposed extending the period during which they could be activated beyond Croatia’s three years, with the possibility of further extension by qualified majority.
What happens next?
The legal wording remains under discussion. EU ambassadors are expected to return to the issue in November, while technical work continues on the activation procedures, monitoring arrangements, voting thresholds and duration of possible measures.
Any final safeguard arrangements would need to form part of a wider accession process. The proposals therefore should not be treated as new EU laws already in force. Further agreement among member states and completion of the relevant enlargement procedures would be required before the provisions could apply.
For Montenegro and other Western Balkan candidates, the debate signals that progress towards membership will involve not only meeting entry requirements but also demonstrating that rule-of-law standards can be maintained after accession.
Conclusion
The EU’s latest enlargement discussions point towards a stricter model for future members, combining pre-accession monitoring with safeguards that could remain available for years after entry. Montenegro is likely to be the first test case, but the final rules have not yet been agreed. The next major step will be further negotiations among EU governments over whether the proposed protections are sufficiently strong without making enlargement unworkably restrictive.