Bosnia reinvents partial people
It’s hard even for me to get excited about what goes on in Bosnia and Herzegovina, but this letter burned a hole in my inbox yesterday, so I repeat it here, with an invitation to those who disagree to reply in kind (that means forcefully but politely, with facts not invective):
Dear Member of Congress,
We write to you as a coalition of civil society organizations from Bosnia and Herzegovina, to voice our concern about the continuing violation of civil and political rights of Bosnians and Herzegovinians grouped under the derisive label of “Others.” While the label constitutionally applies to the country’s 17 ethnic minorities, such as Jews and Roma, it is also used in public discourse to describe citizens who refuse to embrace ethnic identification and/or espouse a civic or national identity.
In 2009, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina, contained in the 1995 Dayton Peace Accords, abridges equal representation rights of its citizens who belong to the so-called “Others” by not allowing them to run for the positions of the country’s presidency or a seat in the upper chamber of Parliament (the House of Peoples). The “Sejdic-Finci” verdict – named after Jakob Finci and Dervo Sejdic, plaintiffs of Jewish and Roma ethnic background – stated that Bosnia and Herzegovina has to amend its constitution to allow citizens such as Finci and Sejdic to enjoy equal civil and political rights as those afforded to the members of the so called “constituent” ethnic groups (Bosniaks, Croats, and Serbs). Should the BiH politicians refuse to implement the ruling, they risk the country’s membership in the Council of Europe, as well as hopes to join its future in the EU and NATO.
To submit a viable EU candidacy application in 2012, Bosnia and Herzegovina has to meet the “Sejdic-Finci” ruling to the European Commission’s satisfaction by November 30, 2012.
However, instead of implementing the verdict, the ruling Social Democratic Party (SDP) and Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ) have agreed to a set of constitutional amendments which not only do little to address the Sejdic-Finci ruling, but also make Bosnia and Herzegovina’s constitution even more discriminatory.
Among several other discriminatory propositions, the amendments proposed by the two parties would introduce a highly discriminatory concept of “vote value.” The “vote value” would assign greater value to votes of citizens belonging to a majority ethnic group within the country’s administrative units. The provision would, in essence, devalue the vote of citizens who are of Jewish, Roma, Polish, Slovak, Czech, German, Albanian, or other recognized minority background, to 40 percent of those who identify themselves as Croats, Serbs or Bosniaks. A completely unnecessary proposition, introduced under the guise of constitutional reforms necessary to address the Sejdic-Finci ruling, this and similar discriminatory amendments would not address any explicit requirements of the EU or the CoE and would, in fact, lead to further violation of human rights. In addition, the proposed constitutional amendments are also in breach of decision of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s Constitutional Court, the country’s highest legal body, which includes three judges appointed by the President of the ECHR. This decision states that it is unconstitutional to uphold the effects of ethnic cleansing and the proposed amendments would do precisely that.
Before the XIV Amendment, the Constitution of the United States of America stated that
Representatives (…) shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, (…) and three fifths of all other Persons.
If the SDP-HDZ agreement is adopted in the Parliament of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the country’s constitution will de facto assign a lesser value to a whole group of its citizens, much like the U.S. Constitution did before the abolition of slavery.
Our coalition of civil society organizations and individuals – spanning from Sarajevo to Banja Luka and from Mostar to Tuzla and including Mr. Dervo Sejdic and Mr. Jakob Finci, the plaintiffs in the Sejdic-Finci ECHR case – is determined to stop these amendments from being adopted in the Parliament of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Committed to democracy and universal human rights, we cannot allow this blatant violation of basic democratic principles and each human being’s inherent equality to be enshrined into our constitution and cemented for years to come.
However, it is our fear that the European Union will fail to see the threat facing the human rights of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s citizens, especially minorities. Eager to see “progress” at any cost, the EU appears likely to accept the proposed SDP-HDZ agreement. We have seen it before: the much-hailed 2007 police reform, completed under the direct supervision of then EU Special Representative Miroslav Lajcak, explicitly renders citizens who do not belong to one of the three constituent ethnic groups ineligible to run the policing agencies of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Yet, the EU accepted this reform as a sign of “progress” and fully endorsed it.
Seventeen years after peace was brought to our war-torn country, thanks to support and leadership of the United States of America – particularly members of the U.S. Congress – we once again need your help. We look to you once again to help us reinforce the values of liberty and equality in our small nation, and join us in the fight to make all of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s citizens equal under law regardless of their ethnicity, religion, or race.
We ask for your support in our opposition to this shameful proposition and demand for a solution that truly provides equal rights to all of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s citizens.
We ask that you help us to convey a clear message to the US and EU decision-makers that the currently proposed SDP-HDZ amendments are not acceptable.
And we ask that you stand by the civil society and citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina as we continue our fight for long-lasting peace, stability, and democracy in our country.
Sincerely,
Mr. Dervo Sejdić
Mr. Jakob Finci
Kali Sara – Roma informative center (Sarajevo)
CA „Why not“ (Sarajevo)
The Association Alumni of the Center for Interdisciplinary Postgraduate Studies (Sarajevo)
Forum of Tuzla citizens (Tuzla)
Sarajevo open center
Youth cultural center Abrašević (Mostar)
Legal institute in BiH (Sarajevo)
CA „Sharp Zero“ (Banja Luka)
Euro Rom (Tuzla)
Youth Initiative for Human Rights (Sarajevo)
Association for Culture and Art CRVENA (Sarajevo)
Citizens’ Action (Sarajevo)
The Association of Independent Creators and Activists “GETO” (Banja Luka)
Revolt (Tuzla)
Foundation „Ekipa“ (Sarajevo) European Research Center (Sarajevo)
Foundation CURE (Sarajevo)
Foundation for Creative Development (Sarajevo)
2 thoughts on “Bosnia reinvents partial people”
Comments are closed.
Giving people autonomy to guarantee minority rights is an old principle that is used worldwide – from the Basques in Spain to the autonomous cantons in Switzerland to the Indian reservations in the US. So there is nothing extraordinary with the Serbs and Croats in Bosnia demanding the same.
Unfortunately Bosnia has a rather weird “multi-ethnic” structure called the Federation. It started as an opportunistic coalition during the war but unfortunately the US saw it as a success for its peacemaking efforts and has since obstructed any efforts to dissolve it.
When the Federation dissolved into a Croat and a Muslim part the rights that are now connected to being part of an ethnic group could be transfered to the region connected to that group. That would solve the problem posed by the “Sejdic-Finci” verdict. As there would be an overwhelming Croat majority in the Croat entity and an overwhelming Serb majority in the Serb entity nobody would worry about voting rights for the minorities in those regions.
The Croat proposal seems like a clumsy effort to get out of this situation. But it seems to me that the people behind the resolution are less interested in resolving the situation than in creating a crisis that could be used as a lever to attack the Dayton structure.
The Three Fifths Compromise
The agreement by the SDP and HDZ is indeed an odious reminder of the decision made at the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 between the Southern and Northern states in which slaves would each count as three-fifths of a person. It should be rejected outright.
R. Bruce Hitchner
Professor, Tufts University
Dayton Peace Accords Project