BRIDGING THE GAP: APPLYING THE PIF DIRECTIVE IN EU CANDIDATE COUNTRIES

The EU manages an independent budget of more than 200 billion euro annually, making it vulnerable to fraud and corruption, which can undermine financial stability and public trust. To combat this, the PIF Directive (2017/1371/EU) harmonises financial crime definitions and mandates enforcement standards, extending to candidate countries including Serbia. This paper analyses Serbia’s compliance with the Directive, testing the hypotheses that despite the legislative reforms, some key challenges remain, notably the lack of a defined ‘EU’s financial interest’ in Serbian law, which hinders prosecution. The analysis also focuses on interagency cooperation and legal alignment with EU bodies such as OLAF and EPPO. Using desk research methodology, the paper assesses Serbia’s legal and institutional framework, offering recommendations to refine legal definitions, strengthen penalties, and enhance investigative capacities, ensuring Serbia meets its Chapter 23 and 24 EU accession requirements.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Strani pravni zivot
Published
2025-10-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.56461/spz_25301kj
Primary Topic
EU Law and Policy Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

BRIDGING THE GAP: APPLYING THE PIF DIRECTIVE IN EU CANDIDATE COUNTRIES

Marina Matić Bošković
Strani pravni zivot
EU Law and Policy Analysis
article

BRIDGING THE GAP: APPLYING THE PIF DIRECTIVE IN EU CANDIDATE COUNTRIES

Marina Matić Bošković
article en

Abstract

The EU manages an independent budget of more than 200 billion euro annually, making it vulnerable to fraud and corruption, which can undermine financial stability and public trust. To combat this, the PIF Directive (2017/1371/EU) harmonises financial crime definitions and mandates enforcement standards, extending to candidate countries including Serbia. This paper analyses Serbia’s compliance with the Directive, testing the hypotheses that despite the legislative reforms, some key challenges remain, notably the lack of a defined ‘EU’s financial interest’ in Serbian law, which hinders prosecution. The analysis also focuses on interagency cooperation and legal alignment with EU bodies such as OLAF and EPPO. Using desk research methodology, the paper assesses Serbia’s legal and institutional framework, offering recommendations to refine legal definitions, strengthen penalties, and enhance investigative capacities, ensuring Serbia meets its Chapter 23 and 24 EU accession requirements.

Strani pravni zivotVol. 69(3)
D.I.I.V. (Croatia) (HR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 56%
EU Law and Policy Analysis
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.