The European Court of Human Rights is facing a crucial decision regarding Bosnia and Herzegovina’s constitution. Dr. Jasmin Mujanović highlights the importance of upholding last year’s ruling that challenged the country’s ethnic power-sharing regime. The ruling, known as the Kovačević decision, confronted the discriminatory provisions of Bosnia’s constitution that limit democratic representation. However, this decision is now being appealed by a coalition of sectarian hardliners and their foreign supporters.
With the re-election of Donald Trump, there is uncertainty surrounding the future of Bosnia’s constitutional reform. If the European Court of Human Rights upholds its previous ruling, it will be left to Trump’s administration to oversee any potential changes to Bosnia’s constitution. Trump may choose to align with Bosnia’s sectarian hardliners, opposing constitutional reform. Alternatively, he could opt for substantive reform, marking a significant breakthrough in the country’s political landscape.
Bosnia’s constitution, a product of the 1995 Dayton Peace Agreement, is considered one of the most complex in the world. The focus on ethnic power-sharing has often come at the expense of basic democratic principles. In recent years, the European Court of Human Rights has struck down several provisions of this constitution, citing violations of human rights. The Kovačević ruling was a significant milestone in this ongoing battle for constitutional reform.
Despite the court’s previous ruling, challenges to Bosnia’s constitutional reform persist. Sectarian nationalist elements within the country, supported by the Croatian government and the High Representative Christian Schmidt, have launched an appeal against the decision. Schmidt’s interventions in favor of the nationalist cause have raised concerns about his impartiality and adherence to legal protocol. The fate of Bosnia’s democracy now hinges on the European Court of Human Rights’ Grand Chamber.
The role of the United States in this matter remains ambiguous. While US officials in Bosnia have been vocal on various issues, they have remained silent on the Kovačević ruling and subsequent appeals. This silence has raised questions about the Biden administration’s stance on Bosnia’s constitutional reform. As the court prepares to make its final decision, the pressure is on to uphold its original ruling based on justice rather than political considerations.
In conclusion, the European Court of Human Rights must prioritize justice in its decision regarding Bosnia’s constitution. Upholding the Kovačević ruling would mark a significant step towards democratic reform in the country. As the international community watches the court’s decision, the fate of Bosnia’s democracy hangs in the balance. It is crucial for the court to resist political pressures and affirm the principles of justice in this landmark case.
