Title: Macedonian President in Annual Address: Focus on Bulgaria Relations, Constitution Amendment for EU Integration
Macedonian President Gorдана Силяновска Давкова delivered her annual address to the parliament, with the key theme being the country’s relations with Bulgaria, the potential amendment of the constitution, and a plan to include ‘Bulgarians’ in it, BGNES reported.
Davкова proposed a solution involving a delayed-action constitutional change, stating that it would benefit both Macedonia and Bulgaria. She urged a bipartisan effort to prioritize EU integration and state interests. The president emphasized that the ‘creative interpretation’ of the negotiation framework makes this the only viable solution, with the constitutional amendments coming into effect upon the conclusion of membership talks and the ratification of the accession treaty.
However, Davкова expressed discontent with the question: "Will you change the constitution?" stating that it offended her both as a professor and a president, as it was unconstitutional for the EU and beyond her authority to guarantee constitutional modifications. She highlighted the importance of separation of powers and parliamentary democracy, emphasizing that only the parliament could amend the constitution.
She praised the harmonious cooperation among government officials in representing the nation’s interests abroad, stressing the importance of accelerating EU integration. However, she cautioned against making mistakes, stating, "It’s high time to act utilitarian, weighing gains and losses, and foreseeing consequences of repeating past mistakes."
Addressing the EU’s stance on Macedonian EU accession, Davkovcsuggested that the EU’s seemingly contradictory position—repeated ‘yes’ votes from the European Parliament and European Commission, but persistent ‘no’ votes from the European Council—was a symptom of democratic deficit within the EU itself. She questioned how a EU member state could ignore rulings from its own human rights court, and emphasized the protection of minority rights in the constitution.
Davcknowledged that the specific mention of a minority in the constitutional preamble was less important than ensuring that the normative text guaranteed the rights of all minorities. She concluded her address, encouraging readers to follow follow-up coverage on Google News Showcase.
