Rule of Law: Supranationalization from the Perspective of Central and Eastern European Countries – The Case of North Macedonia - Acta Universitatis Sapientiae

Acta Univ. Sapientiae, Legal Studies, 14, 1 (2025) 33–51

DOI: 10.47745/AUSLEG.2025.14.1.03

Abstract. North Macedonia is not immune to the diverse perspectives and contexts through which the rule of law is examined across Europe and globally. The rule of law, therefore, cannot be insulated from prevailing theoretical and practical considerations regarding its essence and meaning, both within the national context and the broader supranational sphere. Even within the European Union, divergent interpretations of the rule of law persist. These differences often stem from contrasting understandings of its nature: on the one hand its generality and on the other its specificity. The general dimension conceptualizes the rule of law as an overarching principle encompassing the core values and elements of a democratic legal order, whereas the specific dimension highlights the distinct features of national legal traditions, underscoring constitutional and cultural identities. Obvious differences exist between the Nordic pragmatic style of the rule of law, the American federal model, the British parliamentary version, the Continental European normative and constitutional style, the Eastern European post-socialist type, and the EU’s formal approach. However, equally clear are the differences among the three traditional concepts – the Anglo-Saxon notion of the rule of law, the German concept of Rechtsstaat, and the French État de droit. These variations present an additional challenge for analysis, which must identify both their connecting points and their divergences. This analysis has great significance especially for the Macedonian legal system, which has historically been, and continues to be, strongly influenced by German legal thought, specifically the concept of the Rechtsstaat. The theoretical and practical differences between the rule of law and the Rechtsstaat highlight the need for a more precise analysis of the rule of law in North Macedonia. In addition to this, the paper will clearly distinguish the elements more inclined to one or the other concept. The study of these two principles and their application in the Macedonian legal system aims to position the national framework within the current process of supranationalization. In the context of the EU enlargement policy towards the Western Balkans, the tension between the universal and particular dimensions of the rule of law has acquired a distinctly political dimension. Candidate countries are expected to fully internalize and apply the EU’s general understanding of the rule of law, yet the Union’s own practice towards its Member States has not always been consistent with those standards. Monitoring of North Macedonia has at times revealed a selective application, with rigorous scrutiny and conditionality imposed on accession candidates more strictly than on Member States facing comparable challenges. This asymmetry, often described as EU ‘double standards’,2 undermines the credibility of the enlargement process and complicates the reception of the rule of law narrative in candidate countries. In practice, such inconsistency risks fostering the perception that the rule of law, rather than being an objective and universally applicable principle, functions as a flexible political instrument shaped by the Union’s strategic interests.

Keywords: rule of law, legal state, supranationalization, constitutional order, constitution, reform