The resolution was adopted by a majority of votes.
Croatia should do its utmost to carry out the necessary reforms so that the negotiations can be concluded in time for the European Parliament to give its assent before the next EU parliamentary election in June 2009, the resolution reads.
The resolution, that is not a legally binding document, commends Croatia for the progress it has made so far on the way to the EU accession.
It emphasises that a thorough reform of the state administration, judiciary and police is a prerequisite for achieving standards necessary for EU membership.
The document also supports the government and opposition in their efforts, despite the forthcoming elections, to take necessary, albeit sometimes difficult decisions, particularly in the field of competition policy and state aid, and points out that those decisions will ultimately benefit all Croatian citizens.
Before adopting the resolution, the European Parliament held a discussion on the document that was based on Croatia's progress report and 24 draft amendments to the report.
During the 30-minute debate, all the 16 parliamentarians who were engaged in the discussion praised Croatia's progress and pointed out the importance of the ongoing reforms.
The Rapporteur for Croatia, Hannes Swoboda, who compiled the report, said that it was an objective and fair document underling the positive sides as well as what remained to be done.
He also stressed the importance of the resolution's section mentioning 2009 as a prospective year for Croatia's entry into the EU, saying that it was well known that it was difficult to reach a consensus in the EU about enlargement.
Swoboda, a Socialist member of the European Parliament from Austria, pointed out that the incumbent Croatian Prime Minister Ivo Sanader had done a great job for Croatia in recent years, and extended gratitude to the former PM, ailing Ivica Racan, who he said opened the EU's door to Croatia.
Speaking on behalf of the European Commission, Commissioner Vladimir Spidla said that negotiations with Croatia had started well and that the screening gave a realistic picture of what Croatia had done and what remained to be done.
We hold that it is an urgent need for Croatia to continue with reforms and achieve results in the reform of the judiciary and the public administration and in the struggle against corruption, Spidla said.
A German parliamentarian in the EP and deputy of the EPP-ED Group, Bernd Posselt, said that Croatia should have already been an EU member.
From the point of view of historical justice, Croatia should have joined the EU together with Hungary and the Czech Republic three years ago, according to Posselt.
This (Croatia's accession) was halted due to the several-year-long occupation of a part of Croatia by the neighbouring country, but Croatia is now finally on the right track to join the EU, Posselt said.
Three Slovene MEPs who took part in the discussion welcomed a compromise regarding an amendment calling on Croatia and Slovenia to use the services of a third party in case they cannot bilaterally resolve their border dispute.
Posselt later told reporters that interpretations that the EP supported the Drnovsek-Racan agreement on the Slovene-Croatian border issues were not correct.
The agreement was not ratified and it does not exist. That is why it is necessary to seek a new agreement, which is recommended in the text (of the resolution), the German politician said and reiterated that the unresolved border issues with Slovenia could not be an obstacle for Croatia to join the EU since Slovenia did not have that problem settled when it joined the EU either.